Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932944AbZJNL1Y (ORCPT ); Wed, 14 Oct 2009 07:27:24 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932595AbZJNL1X (ORCPT ); Wed, 14 Oct 2009 07:27:23 -0400 Received: from mail-fx0-f227.google.com ([209.85.220.227]:34076 "EHLO mail-fx0-f227.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932574AbZJNL1W convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Wed, 14 Oct 2009 07:27:22 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=pSUuDGUiRz5/cqtn23D9D4sTRErWgEfz+nynJTsh+0+oY5UD/p4lUddpqAgXte8pt9 AC6dud7rZ2VdxIymZJWmoduElxJubewTKrgBkuHTnca9LNzGFu4GQmmTL+4rbervQr/i F4eO8PAGX4g0FnlvC1dE177g2+/MQs3Wro4x4= MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: <200909261428.06802.bart.vanassche@gmail.com> <19f34abd0910020051h5a831729vcfca50b7bd9f9104@mail.gmail.com> Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2009 13:26:45 +0200 Message-ID: <19f34abd0910140426vd9bcb41x460ed8779b7495a5@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH 2.6.31.1] include/linux/kmemcheck.h: fix a sparse warning From: Vegard Nossum To: Bart Van Assche Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andrew Morton , Greg KH Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 3003 Lines: 57 2009/10/14 Bart Van Assche : > On Fri, Oct 2, 2009 at 9:51 AM, Vegard Nossum wrote: >> >> 2009/10/2 Bart Van Assche : >> > On Sat, Sep 26, 2009 at 2:28 PM, Bart Van Assche >> > wrote: >> >> >> >> Checking a 2.6.31.1 kernel configured with allyesconfig/allmodconfig >> >> with sparse (make C=2) triggers a sparse warning on code that uses the >> >> kmemcheck_annotate_bitfield() macro. An example of such a warning: >> >> >> >> include/net/inet_sock.h:208:17: warning: do-while statement is not a compound statement >> >> >> >> Signed-off-by: Bart Van Assche >> >> Cc: Vegard Nossum >> >> Cc: Andrew Morton >> >> >> >> --- linux-2.6.31.1/include/linux/kmemcheck-orig.h       2009-09-26 13:53:44.000000000 +0200 >> >> +++ linux-2.6.31.1/include/linux/kmemcheck.h    2009-09-26 13:53:56.000000000 +0200 >> >> @@ -137,13 +137,13 @@ static inline void kmemcheck_mark_initia >> >>        int name##_end[0]; >> >> >> >>  #define kmemcheck_annotate_bitfield(ptr, name)                         \ >> >> -       do if (ptr) {                                                   \ >> >> +       do { if (ptr) {                                                 \ >> >>                int _n = (long) &((ptr)->name##_end)                    \ >> >>                        - (long) &((ptr)->name##_begin);                \ >> >>                BUILD_BUG_ON(_n < 0);                                   \ >> >>                                                                        \ >> >>                kmemcheck_mark_initialized(&((ptr)->name##_begin), _n); \ >> >> -       } while (0) >> >> +       } } while (0) >> >> >> >>  #define kmemcheck_annotate_variable(var)                               \ >> >>        do {                                                            \ >> > >> > (ping) >> > >> > Did anyone already have the time to review the patch above ? >> >> A patch for this problem has already been applied in latest mainline. > > Unfortunately this issue is still present in 2.6.31.4, which has been > released on October 12 (yesterday). Is the patch that has been applied > in the mainline kernel suitable for backporting ? I assumed that this wouldn't be suitable for stable kernels, as the change is purely syntactic. Is there a good reason for applying this patch to the stable series? Perhaps Greg can answer this (Cced)? Vegard -- 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/