From: Jiri Kosina <[email protected]>
Commits 9b46a051e4 ("x86/mm: Initialize vmemmap_base at boot-time") and
a7412546d8 ("x86/mm: Adjust vmalloc base and size at boot-time") lost the
type information for __VMALLOC_BASE_L4, __VMALLOC_BASE_L5,
__VMEMMAP_BASE_L4 and __VMEMMAP_BASE_L5 constants.
Let's declare them explicitly unsigned long again.
Fixes: 9b46a051e4 ("x86/mm: Initialize vmemmap_base at boot-time")
Fixes: a7412546d8 ("x86/mm: Adjust vmalloc base and size at boot-time")
Signed-off-by: Jiri Kosina <[email protected]>
---
arch/x86/include/asm/pgtable_64_types.h | 8 ++++----
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/pgtable_64_types.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/pgtable_64_types.h
index d5c21a3..adb4755 100644
--- a/arch/x86/include/asm/pgtable_64_types.h
+++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/pgtable_64_types.h
@@ -105,14 +105,14 @@
#define LDT_PGD_ENTRY (pgtable_l5_enabled ? LDT_PGD_ENTRY_L5 : LDT_PGD_ENTRY_L4)
#define LDT_BASE_ADDR (LDT_PGD_ENTRY << PGDIR_SHIFT)
-#define __VMALLOC_BASE_L4 0xffffc90000000000
-#define __VMALLOC_BASE_L5 0xffa0000000000000
+#define __VMALLOC_BASE_L4 0xffffc90000000000UL
+#define __VMALLOC_BASE_L5 0xffa0000000000000UL
#define VMALLOC_SIZE_TB_L4 32UL
#define VMALLOC_SIZE_TB_L5 12800UL
-#define __VMEMMAP_BASE_L4 0xffffea0000000000
-#define __VMEMMAP_BASE_L5 0xffd4000000000000
+#define __VMEMMAP_BASE_L4 0xffffea0000000000UL
+#define __VMEMMAP_BASE_L5 0xffd4000000000000UL
#ifdef CONFIG_DYNAMIC_MEMORY_LAYOUT
# define VMALLOC_START vmalloc_base
--
Jiri Kosina
SUSE Labs
On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 02:39:10PM +0200, Jiri Kosina wrote:
> From: Jiri Kosina <[email protected]>
>
> Commits 9b46a051e4 ("x86/mm: Initialize vmemmap_base at boot-time") and
> a7412546d8 ("x86/mm: Adjust vmalloc base and size at boot-time") lost the
> type information for __VMALLOC_BASE_L4, __VMALLOC_BASE_L5,
> __VMEMMAP_BASE_L4 and __VMEMMAP_BASE_L5 constants.
>
> Let's declare them explicitly unsigned long again.
It is just cosmetics, right? I mean these literals are 'unsigned long'
anyway.
--
Kirill A. Shutemov
On Thu, 12 Apr 2018, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
> > Commits 9b46a051e4 ("x86/mm: Initialize vmemmap_base at boot-time") and
> > a7412546d8 ("x86/mm: Adjust vmalloc base and size at boot-time") lost the
> > type information for __VMALLOC_BASE_L4, __VMALLOC_BASE_L5,
> > __VMEMMAP_BASE_L4 and __VMEMMAP_BASE_L5 constants.
> >
> > Let's declare them explicitly unsigned long again.
>
> It is just cosmetics, right? I mean these literals are 'unsigned long'
> anyway.
Yeah, I can't imagine this particular case leading to any overflow
scenario, as the literal is big enough to be automatically treated as
unsigned long by the compiler, but it shuts up sparse which treats this as
a generic case (where the missing UL might be a problem), and totally
pollutes the build output.
Either we put the 'UL' there, or teach sparse about figuring out the
'closer bigger fitting type' for hexadecimal literals, which might be more
tricky.
Thanks,
--
Jiri Kosina
SUSE Labs
On Mon, Apr 16, 2018 at 09:43:02AM +0000, Jiri Kosina wrote:
> On Thu, 12 Apr 2018, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
>
> > > Commits 9b46a051e4 ("x86/mm: Initialize vmemmap_base at boot-time") and
> > > a7412546d8 ("x86/mm: Adjust vmalloc base and size at boot-time") lost the
> > > type information for __VMALLOC_BASE_L4, __VMALLOC_BASE_L5,
> > > __VMEMMAP_BASE_L4 and __VMEMMAP_BASE_L5 constants.
> > >
> > > Let's declare them explicitly unsigned long again.
> >
> > It is just cosmetics, right? I mean these literals are 'unsigned long'
> > anyway.
>
> Yeah, I can't imagine this particular case leading to any overflow
> scenario, as the literal is big enough to be automatically treated as
> unsigned long by the compiler, but it shuts up sparse which treats this as
> a generic case (where the missing UL might be a problem), and totally
> pollutes the build output.
>
> Either we put the 'UL' there, or teach sparse about figuring out the
> 'closer bigger fitting type' for hexadecimal literals, which might be more
> tricky.
I don't have a problem with the patch:
Acked-by: Kirill A. Shutemov <[email protected]>
--
Kirill A. Shutemov
On Mon, Apr 16, 2018 at 11:43:02AM +0200, Jiri Kosina wrote:
> On Thu, 12 Apr 2018, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
>
> > > Commits 9b46a051e4 ("x86/mm: Initialize vmemmap_base at boot-time") and
> > > a7412546d8 ("x86/mm: Adjust vmalloc base and size at boot-time") lost the
> > > type information for __VMALLOC_BASE_L4, __VMALLOC_BASE_L5,
> > > __VMEMMAP_BASE_L4 and __VMEMMAP_BASE_L5 constants.
> > >
> > > Let's declare them explicitly unsigned long again.
> >
> > It is just cosmetics, right? I mean these literals are 'unsigned long'
> > anyway.
>
> Yeah, I can't imagine this particular case leading to any overflow
> scenario, as the literal is big enough to be automatically treated as
> unsigned long by the compiler, but it shuts up sparse which treats this as
> a generic case (where the missing UL might be a problem), and totally
> pollutes the build output.
>
> Either we put the 'UL' there, or teach sparse about figuring out the
> 'closer bigger fitting type' for hexadecimal literals, which might be more
> tricky.
Hi,
If you're talking about sparse's 'constant ... is so big it is ...',
there is nothing to teach sparse about as it knows perfectly the
(correct) type of the constant (which is printed at the end).
The warning is there on purpose.
Cheers,
-- Luc Van Oostenryck
On Mon, 16 Apr 2018, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
> > > > Commits 9b46a051e4 ("x86/mm: Initialize vmemmap_base at boot-time") and
> > > > a7412546d8 ("x86/mm: Adjust vmalloc base and size at boot-time") lost the
> > > > type information for __VMALLOC_BASE_L4, __VMALLOC_BASE_L5,
> > > > __VMEMMAP_BASE_L4 and __VMEMMAP_BASE_L5 constants.
> > > >
> > > > Let's declare them explicitly unsigned long again.
> > >
> > > It is just cosmetics, right? I mean these literals are 'unsigned long'
> > > anyway.
> >
> > Yeah, I can't imagine this particular case leading to any overflow
> > scenario, as the literal is big enough to be automatically treated as
> > unsigned long by the compiler, but it shuts up sparse which treats this as
> > a generic case (where the missing UL might be a problem), and totally
> > pollutes the build output.
> >
> > Either we put the 'UL' there, or teach sparse about figuring out the
> > 'closer bigger fitting type' for hexadecimal literals, which might be more
> > tricky.
>
> I don't have a problem with the patch:
>
> Acked-by: Kirill A. Shutemov <[email protected]>
x86 folks, any objections to merging this? Without it, the sparse build is
currently totally unreadable mess.
Thanks,
--
Jiri Kosina
SUSE Labs
On Mon, 16 Apr 2018, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
> > > > Commits 9b46a051e4 ("x86/mm: Initialize vmemmap_base at boot-time") and
> > > > a7412546d8 ("x86/mm: Adjust vmalloc base and size at boot-time") lost the
> > > > type information for __VMALLOC_BASE_L4, __VMALLOC_BASE_L5,
> > > > __VMEMMAP_BASE_L4 and __VMEMMAP_BASE_L5 constants.
> > > >
> > > > Let's declare them explicitly unsigned long again.
> > >
> > > It is just cosmetics, right? I mean these literals are 'unsigned long'
> > > anyway.
> >
> > Yeah, I can't imagine this particular case leading to any overflow
> > scenario, as the literal is big enough to be automatically treated as
> > unsigned long by the compiler, but it shuts up sparse which treats this as
> > a generic case (where the missing UL might be a problem), and totally
> > pollutes the build output.
> >
> > Either we put the 'UL' there, or teach sparse about figuring out the
> > 'closer bigger fitting type' for hexadecimal literals, which might be more
> > tricky.
>
> I don't have a problem with the patch:
>
> Acked-by: Kirill A. Shutemov <[email protected]>
ping, please?
sparse build is still noisy like hell :/
Thanks,
--
Jiri Kosina
SUSE Labs
On Thu, 26 Apr 2018, Jiri Kosina wrote:
> On Mon, 16 Apr 2018, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
>
> > > > > Commits 9b46a051e4 ("x86/mm: Initialize vmemmap_base at boot-time") and
> > > > > a7412546d8 ("x86/mm: Adjust vmalloc base and size at boot-time") lost the
> > > > > type information for __VMALLOC_BASE_L4, __VMALLOC_BASE_L5,
> > > > > __VMEMMAP_BASE_L4 and __VMEMMAP_BASE_L5 constants.
> > > > >
> > > > > Let's declare them explicitly unsigned long again.
> > > >
> > > > It is just cosmetics, right? I mean these literals are 'unsigned long'
> > > > anyway.
> > >
> > > Yeah, I can't imagine this particular case leading to any overflow
> > > scenario, as the literal is big enough to be automatically treated as
> > > unsigned long by the compiler, but it shuts up sparse which treats this as
> > > a generic case (where the missing UL might be a problem), and totally
> > > pollutes the build output.
> > >
> > > Either we put the 'UL' there, or teach sparse about figuring out the
> > > 'closer bigger fitting type' for hexadecimal literals, which might be more
> > > tricky.
> >
> > I don't have a problem with the patch:
> >
> > Acked-by: Kirill A. Shutemov <[email protected]>
>
> ping, please?
>
> sparse build is still noisy like hell :/
/me goes to dig it out in the pile ....
Commit-ID: 14d12bb8582e158006c35cce0f8ae1706094f9a4
Gitweb: https://git.kernel.org/tip/14d12bb8582e158006c35cce0f8ae1706094f9a4
Author: Jiri Kosina <[email protected]>
AuthorDate: Thu, 12 Apr 2018 14:39:10 +0200
Committer: Thomas Gleixner <[email protected]>
CommitDate: Thu, 26 Apr 2018 14:56:24 +0200
x86/mm: Make vmemmap and vmalloc base address constants unsigned long
Commits 9b46a051e4 ("x86/mm: Initialize vmemmap_base at boot-time") and
a7412546d8 ("x86/mm: Adjust vmalloc base and size at boot-time") lost the
type information for __VMALLOC_BASE_L4, __VMALLOC_BASE_L5,
__VMEMMAP_BASE_L4 and __VMEMMAP_BASE_L5 constants.
Declare them explicitly unsigned long again.
Fixes: 9b46a051e4 ("x86/mm: Initialize vmemmap_base at boot-time")
Fixes: a7412546d8 ("x86/mm: Adjust vmalloc base and size at boot-time")
Signed-off-by: Jiri Kosina <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <[email protected]>
Acked-by: "Kirill A. Shutemov" <[email protected]>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/[email protected]
---
arch/x86/include/asm/pgtable_64_types.h | 8 ++++----
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/pgtable_64_types.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/pgtable_64_types.h
index d5c21a382475..adb47552e6bb 100644
--- a/arch/x86/include/asm/pgtable_64_types.h
+++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/pgtable_64_types.h
@@ -105,14 +105,14 @@ extern unsigned int ptrs_per_p4d;
#define LDT_PGD_ENTRY (pgtable_l5_enabled ? LDT_PGD_ENTRY_L5 : LDT_PGD_ENTRY_L4)
#define LDT_BASE_ADDR (LDT_PGD_ENTRY << PGDIR_SHIFT)
-#define __VMALLOC_BASE_L4 0xffffc90000000000
-#define __VMALLOC_BASE_L5 0xffa0000000000000
+#define __VMALLOC_BASE_L4 0xffffc90000000000UL
+#define __VMALLOC_BASE_L5 0xffa0000000000000UL
#define VMALLOC_SIZE_TB_L4 32UL
#define VMALLOC_SIZE_TB_L5 12800UL
-#define __VMEMMAP_BASE_L4 0xffffea0000000000
-#define __VMEMMAP_BASE_L5 0xffd4000000000000
+#define __VMEMMAP_BASE_L4 0xffffea0000000000UL
+#define __VMEMMAP_BASE_L5 0xffd4000000000000UL
#ifdef CONFIG_DYNAMIC_MEMORY_LAYOUT
# define VMALLOC_START vmalloc_base