|
|
i |
Re: [PATCH] check spinlock_t/rwlock_t argument type on non-SMP builds | |
| [Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] | |
* David Kilroy <kilroyd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > When writing code for UP without CONFIG_DEBUG_SPINLOCK it's easy > to get the first argument to the spinlock/rwlock functions wrong. > This is because the parameter is not actually used in this > configuration. > > Typically you will only find out it's wrong > * by rebuilding with CONFIG_SMP or CONFIG_DEBUG_SPINLOCK > * after you've submitted your beautiful patch series. > > The first means a long wait, and the latter is a bit late. > > Add typechecking on the first argument of these macro functions. > Note that since the typecheck now references the variable, the > explicit read is redundant and can be removed. > > This change causes compiler warnings in net/ipv4/route.c, as this > passes NULL as the first argument in the UP configuration. Simply > cast this. Wondering - can the wrappers be moved from CPP land to C land by turning them into inlines? (i havent checked all usages so there might be some surprises, but by and large it ought to be possible.) Ingo -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
[Kernel List] [Site Home] [Ethernet Bridging] [Git] [IETF Annouce] [Linux Assembly] [VLAN] [Networking] [Security] [Bugtraq] [Rubini] [Photo] [Singles Social Networking] [Yosemite] [MIPS Linux] [ARM Linux] [Linux Virtualization] [Linux Security] [Linux IDE] [Linux RAID] [Linux SCSI] [Linux Wireless] [DDR & Rambus] [Free Dating] [Linux Resources] [Wireless Reading Device]
![]() |
![]() |