From: Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
To: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
Cc: linux-api@vger.kernel.org, linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org,
Ryusuke Konishi <konishi.ryusuke@lab.ntt.co.jp>,
linux-nilfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 07/11] UAPI: nilfs2: Fix use of undefined byteswapping functions
Date: Wed, 5 Sep 2018 23:20:05 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180905222005.GS19965@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <153616292366.23468.14988166998690800938.stgit@warthog.procyon.org.uk>
On Wed, Sep 05, 2018 at 04:55:23PM +0100, David Howells wrote:
> nilfs_checkpoint_set_##name(struct nilfs_checkpoint *cp) \
> { \
> - cp->cp_flags = cpu_to_le32(le32_to_cpu(cp->cp_flags) | \
> + cp->cp_flags = __cpu_to_le32(__le32_to_cpu(cp->cp_flags) | \
> (1UL << NILFS_CHECKPOINT_##flag)); \
How about sanitiziung the damn thing to
cp->cp_flags |= __cpu_to_le32(1UL << NILFS_CHECKPOINT_##flag));
while you are at it? Or, perhaps, even
#define NILFS2_CP_FLAG(flag) __cpu_to_le32(1UL << NILFS_CHECKPOINT_##flag)
and cp->cp_flags |= NILFS2_CP_FLAG(flag) for this one,
> } \
> static inline void \
> nilfs_checkpoint_clear_##name(struct nilfs_checkpoint *cp) \
> { \
> - cp->cp_flags = cpu_to_le32(le32_to_cpu(cp->cp_flags) & \
> + cp->cp_flags = __cpu_to_le32(__le32_to_cpu(cp->cp_flags) & \
> ~(1UL << NILFS_CHECKPOINT_##flag)); \
cp->cp_flags &= ~NILFS2_CP_FLAG(flag);
here
> } \
> static inline int \
> nilfs_checkpoint_##name(const struct nilfs_checkpoint *cp) \
> { \
> - return !!(le32_to_cpu(cp->cp_flags) & \
> + return !!(__le32_to_cpu(cp->cp_flags) & \
> (1UL << NILFS_CHECKPOINT_##flag)); \
and !!(cp->cp_flags & NILFS2_CP_FLAG(flag)
here? Or maybe even make the damn thing bool and lose the !! here...
)> }
>
and similar for those:
> @@ -595,20 +596,20 @@ enum {
> static inline void \
> nilfs_segment_usage_set_##name(struct nilfs_segment_usage *su) \
> { \
> - su->su_flags = cpu_to_le32(le32_to_cpu(su->su_flags) | \
> + su->su_flags = __cpu_to_le32(__le32_to_cpu(su->su_flags) | \
> (1UL << NILFS_SEGMENT_USAGE_##flag));\
> } \
> static inline void \
> nilfs_segment_usage_clear_##name(struct nilfs_segment_usage *su) \
> { \
> su->su_flags = \
> - cpu_to_le32(le32_to_cpu(su->su_flags) & \
> + __cpu_to_le32(__le32_to_cpu(su->su_flags) & \
> ~(1UL << NILFS_SEGMENT_USAGE_##flag)); \
> } \
> static inline int \
> nilfs_segment_usage_##name(const struct nilfs_segment_usage *su) \
> { \
> - return !!(le32_to_cpu(su->su_flags) & \
> + return !!(__le32_to_cpu(su->su_flags) & \
> (1UL << NILFS_SEGMENT_USAGE_##flag)); \
> }
> @@ -619,15 +620,15 @@ NILFS_SEGMENT_USAGE_FNS(ERROR, error)
> static inline void
> nilfs_segment_usage_set_clean(struct nilfs_segment_usage *su)
> {
> - su->su_lastmod = cpu_to_le64(0);
> - su->su_nblocks = cpu_to_le32(0);
> - su->su_flags = cpu_to_le32(0);
> + su->su_lastmod = __cpu_to_le64(0);
> + su->su_nblocks = __cpu_to_le32(0);
> + su->su_flags = __cpu_to_le32(0);
> }
>
> static inline int
> nilfs_segment_usage_clean(const struct nilfs_segment_usage *su)
> {
> - return !le32_to_cpu(su->su_flags);
> + return !__le32_to_cpu(su->su_flags);
"Check that after byteswap it becomes 0", is it? How is that different
from return !su->su_flags; ?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-09-05 22:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-09-05 15:54 [RFC] UAPI: Check headers by compiling all together as C++ David Howells
2018-09-05 15:55 ` [PATCH 05/11] UAPI: coda: Don't use internal kernel structs in UAPI David Howells
2018-09-05 16:54 ` Jan Harkes
2018-09-05 17:12 ` Yann Droneaud
2018-09-05 17:28 ` Jan Harkes
2018-09-05 17:24 ` David Howells
2018-09-06 7:13 ` David Howells
2018-09-06 11:52 ` Yann Droneaud
2018-09-06 12:16 ` Jan Harkes
2018-09-06 14:53 ` David Howells
2018-09-05 15:55 ` [PATCH 07/11] UAPI: nilfs2: Fix use of undefined byteswapping functions David Howells
2018-09-05 22:20 ` Al Viro [this message]
2018-09-05 16:55 ` [RFC] UAPI: Check headers by compiling all together as C++ Greg KH
2018-09-05 17:33 ` Yann Droneaud
2018-09-05 17:42 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2018-09-06 7:12 ` Yann Droneaud
2018-09-05 19:22 ` Jan Engelhardt
2018-09-05 17:50 ` David Howells
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20180905222005.GS19965@ZenIV.linux.org.uk \
--to=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=konishi.ryusuke@lab.ntt.co.jp \
--cc=linux-api@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-nilfs@vger.kernel.org \
--subject='Re: [PATCH 07/11] UAPI: nilfs2: Fix use of undefined byteswapping functions' \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
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).