Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932996AbbEET5F (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 May 2015 15:57:05 -0400 Received: from mail-bl2on0119.outbound.protection.outlook.com ([65.55.169.119]:59840 "EHLO na01-bl2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932282AbbEET5C (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 May 2015 15:57:02 -0400 Authentication-Results: oracle.com; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none; Message-ID: <1430855801.16357.251.camel@freescale.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/7] staging: fsl-mc: MC bus IRQ support From: Scott Wood To: Dan Carpenter CC: Jose Rivera , "devel@driverdev.osuosl.org" , Stuart Yoder , "bhamciu1@freescale.com" , "arnd@arndb.de" , "bhupesh.sharma@freescale.com" , "gregkh@linuxfoundation.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "agraf@suse.de" , "nir.erez@freescale.com" , "itai.katz@freescale.com" , "R89243@freescale.com" , Richard Schmitt Date: Tue, 5 May 2015 14:56:41 -0500 In-Reply-To: <20150505164011.GT14154@mwanda> References: <1430242750-17745-1-git-send-email-German.Rivera@freescale.com> <1430242750-17745-2-git-send-email-German.Rivera@freescale.com> <20150430114957.GW14154@mwanda> <20150505084830.GL16501@mwanda> <20150505164011.GT14154@mwanda> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.12.10-0ubuntu1~14.10.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Originating-IP: [2601:2:5800:3f7:12bf:48ff:fe84:c9a0] X-ClientProxiedBy: BN3PR09CA0008.namprd09.prod.outlook.com (25.160.111.146) To CY1PR03MB1488.namprd03.prod.outlook.com (25.163.17.18) X-Microsoft-Antispam: UriScan:;BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:CY1PR03MB1488; X-Microsoft-Antispam-PRVS: X-Exchange-Antispam-Report-Test: UriScan:; X-Exchange-Antispam-Report-CFA-Test: BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:(601004)(5005006)(3002001);SRVR:CY1PR03MB1488;BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:CY1PR03MB1488; X-Forefront-PRVS: 0567A15835 X-Forefront-Antispam-Report: SFV:NSPM;SFS:(10019020)(6009001)(24454002)(51704005)(52314003)(377424004)(47776003)(93886004)(110136002)(40100003)(62966003)(107886002)(5001960100002)(122386002)(50226001)(92566002)(5820100001)(103116003)(77156002)(86362001)(2950100001)(76176999)(50466002)(87976001)(36756003)(42186005)(33646002)(50986999)(46102003)(23676002)(3826002)(4001430100001);DIR:OUT;SFP:1102;SCL:1;SRVR:CY1PR03MB1488;H:[IPv6:2601:2:5800:3f7:12bf:48ff:fe84:c9a0];FPR:;SPF:None;MLV:sfv;LANG:en; X-OriginatorOrg: freescale.com X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-OriginalArrivalTime: 05 May 2015 19:56:55.8163 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-FromEntityHeader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: CY1PR03MB1488 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2309 Lines: 53 On Tue, 2015-05-05 at 19:40 +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote: > On Tue, May 05, 2015 at 04:08:49PM +0000, Jose Rivera wrote: > > > Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/7] staging: fsl-mc: MC bus IRQ support > > > > > > On Mon, May 04, 2015 at 10:09:08PM +0000, Jose Rivera wrote: > > > > > > + WARN_ON((int16_t)irq_count < 0); > > > > > > > > > > This code is doing "WARN_ON(test_bit(15, (unsigned long > > > *)&irq_count));". > > > > > That seems like nonsense. Anyway, just delete the WARN_ON(). > > > > > > > > > I disagree. This WARN_ON is checking that irq_count is in the expected > > > > range (it fits in int16_t as a positive number). The > > > > dprc_scan_objects() function expects irq_count to be of type "unsigned > > > > int" (which is 32-bit unsigned) > > > > > > > > > > You're not allowed to disagree because it's a testable thing and not an > > > opinion about style or something. :P What you want is: > > > > > > WARN_ON(irq_count > SHRT_MAX); > > > > > I see your point now. The check "(int16_t)irq_count < 0)" will not be able > > to catch 0x10000 > 0x7fff, but "irq_count > SHRT_MAX) will. So I'll > > make the suggested change, but I would prefer to use S16_MAX rather than > > SHRT_MAX. > > > > Huh? I didn't even know about the S16_MAX definition. There are > literally no users of it in the kernel. It's not very fair because > there are few users of SHRT_MAX. But there are literally no users of > S32_MAX in the kernel and 358 users of INT_MAX. > > Don't insist that you must be special and different from everyone else. There are some users of U16_MAX, U32_MAX, and U64_MAX. Why use a limit for a different type than is being used? Why have s16/s32 at all if you're going to conflate it with short/int elsewhere? That said, I don't see where this code is actually using s16 (or int16_t) for irq_count except in these weird error checks. German, why do you need to check against 0x7fff (whatever you call it) at all? Won't comparing to a promoted-to-unsigned-int .max_count (as you do immediately after the WARN_ON) suffice? -Scott -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/