* Re: [Cocci] [PATCH -next] iwlwifi: pcie: Use bitwise instead of arithmetic operator for flags [not found] ` <bfd6b3a7db0c50cd3d084510bd43c9e540688edd.camel@intel.com> @ 2020-05-06 15:15 ` Joe Perches 2020-05-07 4:10 ` Samuel Zou 0 siblings, 1 reply; 2+ messages in thread From: Joe Perches @ 2020-05-06 15:15 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Luciano Coelho, Samuel Zou, johannes.berg, emmanuel.grumbach, linuxwifi, kvalo, davem, Julia Lawall Cc: netdev, linux-wireless, linux-kernel, cocci On Wed, 2020-05-06 at 16:51 +0300, Luciano Coelho wrote: > On Tue, 2020-05-05 at 20:19 -0700, Joe Perches wrote: > > On Wed, 2020-05-06 at 11:07 +0800, Samuel Zou wrote: > > > This silences the following coccinelle warning: > > > > > > "WARNING: sum of probable bitmasks, consider |" > > > > I suggest instead ignoring bad and irrelevant warnings. > > > > PREFIX_LEN is 32 not 0x20 or BIT(5) > > PCI_DUMP_SIZE is 352 > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/intel/iwlwifi/pcie/trans.c b/drivers/net/wireless/intel/iwlwifi/pcie/trans.c > > [] > > > @@ -109,9 +109,9 @@ void iwl_trans_pcie_dump_regs(struct iwl_trans *trans) > > > > > > /* Alloc a max size buffer */ > > > alloc_size = PCI_ERR_ROOT_ERR_SRC + 4 + PREFIX_LEN; > > > - alloc_size = max_t(u32, alloc_size, PCI_DUMP_SIZE + PREFIX_LEN); > > > - alloc_size = max_t(u32, alloc_size, PCI_MEM_DUMP_SIZE + PREFIX_LEN); > > > - alloc_size = max_t(u32, alloc_size, PCI_PARENT_DUMP_SIZE + PREFIX_LEN); > > > + alloc_size = max_t(u32, alloc_size, PCI_DUMP_SIZE | PREFIX_LEN); > > > + alloc_size = max_t(u32, alloc_size, PCI_MEM_DUMP_SIZE | PREFIX_LEN); > > > + alloc_size = max_t(u32, alloc_size, PCI_PARENT_DUMP_SIZE | PREFIX_LEN); > > > > > > buf = kmalloc(alloc_size, GFP_ATOMIC); > > > if (!buf) > > Yeah, those macros are clearly not bitmasks. I'm dropping this patch. Can the cocci script that generated this warning scripts/coccinelle/misc/orplus.cocci be dropped or improved to validate the likelihood that the defines or constants used are more likely than not are bit values? Maybe these should be defined as hex or BIT or BIT_ULL or GENMASK or the like? Right now it seems it just tests for two constants. _______________________________________________ Cocci mailing list Cocci@systeme.lip6.fr https://systeme.lip6.fr/mailman/listinfo/cocci ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
* Re: [Cocci] [PATCH -next] iwlwifi: pcie: Use bitwise instead of arithmetic operator for flags 2020-05-06 15:15 ` [Cocci] [PATCH -next] iwlwifi: pcie: Use bitwise instead of arithmetic operator for flags Joe Perches @ 2020-05-07 4:10 ` Samuel Zou 0 siblings, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread From: Samuel Zou @ 2020-05-07 4:10 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Joe Perches, Luciano Coelho, johannes.berg, emmanuel.grumbach, linuxwifi, kvalo, davem, Julia Lawall Cc: netdev, linux-wireless, linux-kernel, cocci Both of you are right. I neglected, and this patch is wrong. Thanks. On 2020/5/6 23:15, Joe Perches wrote: > On Wed, 2020-05-06 at 16:51 +0300, Luciano Coelho wrote: >> On Tue, 2020-05-05 at 20:19 -0700, Joe Perches wrote: >>> On Wed, 2020-05-06 at 11:07 +0800, Samuel Zou wrote: >>>> This silences the following coccinelle warning: >>>> >>>> "WARNING: sum of probable bitmasks, consider |" >>> >>> I suggest instead ignoring bad and irrelevant warnings. >>> >>> PREFIX_LEN is 32 not 0x20 or BIT(5) >>> PCI_DUMP_SIZE is 352 >>> >>>> diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/intel/iwlwifi/pcie/trans.c b/drivers/net/wireless/intel/iwlwifi/pcie/trans.c >>> [] >>>> @@ -109,9 +109,9 @@ void iwl_trans_pcie_dump_regs(struct iwl_trans *trans) >>>> >>>> /* Alloc a max size buffer */ >>>> alloc_size = PCI_ERR_ROOT_ERR_SRC + 4 + PREFIX_LEN; >>>> - alloc_size = max_t(u32, alloc_size, PCI_DUMP_SIZE + PREFIX_LEN); >>>> - alloc_size = max_t(u32, alloc_size, PCI_MEM_DUMP_SIZE + PREFIX_LEN); >>>> - alloc_size = max_t(u32, alloc_size, PCI_PARENT_DUMP_SIZE + PREFIX_LEN); >>>> + alloc_size = max_t(u32, alloc_size, PCI_DUMP_SIZE | PREFIX_LEN); >>>> + alloc_size = max_t(u32, alloc_size, PCI_MEM_DUMP_SIZE | PREFIX_LEN); >>>> + alloc_size = max_t(u32, alloc_size, PCI_PARENT_DUMP_SIZE | PREFIX_LEN); >>>> >>>> buf = kmalloc(alloc_size, GFP_ATOMIC); >>>> if (!buf) >> >> Yeah, those macros are clearly not bitmasks. I'm dropping this patch. > > Can the cocci script that generated this warning > > scripts/coccinelle/misc/orplus.cocci > > be dropped or improved to validate the likelihood that > the defines or constants used are more likely than > not are bit values? > > Maybe these should be defined as hex or BIT or BIT_ULL > or GENMASK or the like? > > > Right now it seems it just tests for two constants. > > > > . > _______________________________________________ Cocci mailing list Cocci@systeme.lip6.fr https://systeme.lip6.fr/mailman/listinfo/cocci ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2020-05-11 9:00 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
[not found] <1588734423-33988-1-git-send-email-zou_wei@huawei.com>
[not found] ` <f8b258e0c8bb073c445090e637195df2fc989543.camel@perches.com>
[not found] ` <bfd6b3a7db0c50cd3d084510bd43c9e540688edd.camel@intel.com>
2020-05-06 15:15 ` [Cocci] [PATCH -next] iwlwifi: pcie: Use bitwise instead of arithmetic operator for flags Joe Perches
2020-05-07 4:10 ` Samuel Zou
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).