Declare the variable as volatile, in order to avoid the clang compiler
warning.
Signed-off-by: John Hubbard <[email protected]>
---
tools/testing/selftests/mm/migration.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/mm/migration.c b/tools/testing/selftests/mm/migration.c
index 1cec8425e3ca..2dede662ff43 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/mm/migration.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/mm/migration.c
@@ -95,7 +95,7 @@ int migrate(uint64_t *ptr, int n1, int n2)
void *access_mem(void *ptr)
{
- uint64_t y = 0;
+ volatile uint64_t y = 0;
volatile uint64_t *x = ptr;
while (1) {
--
2.40.1
On 02.06.23 03:33, John Hubbard wrote:
> Declare the variable as volatile, in order to avoid the clang compiler
> warning.
>
> Signed-off-by: John Hubbard <[email protected]>
> ---
> tools/testing/selftests/mm/migration.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/mm/migration.c b/tools/testing/selftests/mm/migration.c
> index 1cec8425e3ca..2dede662ff43 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/mm/migration.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/mm/migration.c
> @@ -95,7 +95,7 @@ int migrate(uint64_t *ptr, int n1, int n2)
>
> void *access_mem(void *ptr)
> {
> - uint64_t y = 0;
> + volatile uint64_t y = 0;
> volatile uint64_t *x = ptr;
>
> while (1) {
Same comment as for previous patch.
--
Thanks,
David / dhildenb
On 6/2/23 03:02, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> On 02.06.23 03:33, John Hubbard wrote:
>> Declare the variable as volatile, in order to avoid the clang compiler
>> warning.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: John Hubbard <[email protected]>
>> ---
>> tools/testing/selftests/mm/migration.c | 2 +-
>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/mm/migration.c b/tools/testing/selftests/mm/migration.c
>> index 1cec8425e3ca..2dede662ff43 100644
>> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/mm/migration.c
>> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/mm/migration.c
>> @@ -95,7 +95,7 @@ int migrate(uint64_t *ptr, int n1, int n2)
>> void *access_mem(void *ptr)
>> {
>> - uint64_t y = 0;
>> + volatile uint64_t y = 0;
>> volatile uint64_t *x = ptr;
>> while (1) {
>
> Same comment as for previous patch.
>
Yes. In fact I'll merge this one into the previous patch, since
they are so similar and small, and have the same fix approach.
thanks,
--
John Hubbard
NVIDIA