Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752452AbbEYLux (ORCPT ); Mon, 25 May 2015 07:50:53 -0400 Received: from hofr.at ([212.69.189.236]:45137 "EHLO mail.hofr.at" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752274AbbEYLut (ORCPT ); Mon, 25 May 2015 07:50:49 -0400 Date: Mon, 25 May 2015 13:50:47 +0200 From: Nicholas Mc Guire To: Tejun Heo Cc: Nicholas Mc Guire , Li Zefan , cgroups@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] cgroup: add explicit cast and comment for return type conversion Message-ID: <20150525115047.GA7413@opentech.at> References: <1432472872-3578-1-git-send-email-hofrat@osadl.org> <20150524203528.GB7099@htj.duckdns.org> <20150525055742.GE1397@opentech.at> <20150525114045.GA526@htj.duckdns.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20150525114045.GA526@htj.duckdns.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1673 Lines: 34 On Mon, 25 May 2015, Tejun Heo wrote: > Hello, Nicholas. > > On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 07:57:42AM +0200, Nicholas Mc Guire wrote: > > nop not downward but signed/unsigned if it were down it would not be > > a problem but signed/unsigned can be - for those cases where it can't > > be fixed up by changing the declarations or return variable types > > explicit cast might make sense - as noted in the patch Im not sure either > > if this form of cleanups is helpful. > > > > In the kernel core there are about 400 signed/unsigned implicit > > conversions (about 3k in the entire kernel) which is what Im trying to > > remove or if that is not possible in a resonable way mark as false positive. > > I still don't get it. What does this buy us actually? If we continue > to do this, people would just learn to add explicit cast when doing > sign conversions. We just converge to a different behavior without > actually gaining any protection. What's the benefit of doing this? > that would be no benefit of course - the goal is not to simply put casts in but to use casts as last resort if type cleanups are not doable or if the type missmatch is intended - the cast then should document that it is intentional and comments explain why it is justified. If that were the result of type cleanup I think it would benefit the kernel code as I suspect that quite a few of the type missmatches simply happened. thx! hofrat -- 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/