[PATCH 1/2] super1: replace hard-coded values with bit definitions

[PATCH 1/2] super1: replace hard-coded values with bit definitions

[Gioh Kim]

Some hard-coded values for disk status are replaced
with bit definitions.

Signed-off-by: Gioh Kim <gi-oh.kim@profitbricks.com>
---
 super1.c | 7 ++++---
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/super1.c b/super1.c
index f3520ac..e8b9f61 100644
--- a/super1.c
+++ b/super1.c
@@ -1010,7 +1010,7 @@ static void getinfo_super1(struct supertype *st, struct mdinfo *info, char *map)
 		info->disk.state = 0; /* spare: not active, not sync, not faulty */
 		break;
 	case MD_DISK_ROLE_FAULTY:
-		info->disk.state = 1; /* faulty */
+		info->disk.state = (1 << MD_DISK_FAULTY); /* faulty */
 		break;
 	case MD_DISK_ROLE_JOURNAL:
 		info->disk.state = (1 << MD_DISK_JOURNAL);
@@ -1503,11 +1503,12 @@ static int add_to_super1(struct supertype *st, mdu_disk_info_t *dk,
 	}
 
 	dk_state = dk->state & ~(1<<MD_DISK_FAILFAST);
-	if ((dk_state & 6) == 6) /* active, sync */
+	if ((dk_state & (1<<MD_DISK_ACTIVE)) &&
+	    (dk_state & (1<<MD_DISK_SYNC)))/* active, sync */
 		*rp = __cpu_to_le16(dk->raid_disk);
 	else if (dk_state & (1<<MD_DISK_JOURNAL))
                 *rp = MD_DISK_ROLE_JOURNAL;
-	else if ((dk_state & ~2) == 0) /* active or idle -> spare */
+	else if ((dk_state & ~(1<<MD_DISK_ACTIVE)) == 0) /* active or idle -> spare */
 		*rp = MD_DISK_ROLE_SPARE;
 	else
 		*rp = MD_DISK_ROLE_FAULTY;
-- 
2.5.0

[PATCH 2/2] mdadm.c: fix compile error "switch condition has boolean value"

[Gioh Kim]

Remove a boolean expression in switch condition
to prevent compile error of some compilers.

Signed-off-by: Gioh Kim <gi-oh.kim@profitbricks.com>
---
 mdadm.c | 6 +++---
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/mdadm.c b/mdadm.c
index 08ddcab..a98a051 100644
--- a/mdadm.c
+++ b/mdadm.c
@@ -1905,11 +1905,11 @@ static int misc_list(struct mddev_dev *devlist,
 			rv |= SetAction(dv->devname, c->action);
 			continue;
 		}
-		switch(dv->devname[0] == '/') {
-			case 0:
+		switch(dv->devname[0]) {
+			default:
 				mdfd = open_dev(dv->devname);
 				if (mdfd >= 0) break;
-			case 1:
+			case '/':
 				mdfd = open_mddev(dv->devname, 1);  
 		}
 		if (mdfd>=0) {
-- 
2.5.0

Re: [PATCH 1/2] super1: replace hard-coded values with bit definitions

[jes.sorensen]

Gioh Kim <gi-oh.kim@profitbricks.com> writes:
> Some hard-coded values for disk status are replaced
> with bit definitions.
>
> Signed-off-by: Gioh Kim <gi-oh.kim@profitbricks.com>
> ---
>  super1.c | 7 ++++---
>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

Applied!

Please use --cover-letter when you send out multi-commit patch sets,
which includes a short description of what the set includes. That way I
can just respond to the cover letter if all the patches are applied.

Thanks,
Jes

Re: [PATCH 2/2] mdadm.c: fix compile error "switch condition has boolean value"

[jes.sorensen]

Gioh Kim <gi-oh.kim@profitbricks.com> writes:
> Remove a boolean expression in switch condition
> to prevent compile error of some compilers.

Please be specific, which compile is unable to handle this?

> Signed-off-by: Gioh Kim <gi-oh.kim@profitbricks.com>
> ---
>  mdadm.c | 6 +++---
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/mdadm.c b/mdadm.c
> index 08ddcab..a98a051 100644
> --- a/mdadm.c
> +++ b/mdadm.c
> @@ -1905,11 +1905,11 @@ static int misc_list(struct mddev_dev *devlist,
>  			rv |= SetAction(dv->devname, c->action);
>  			continue;
>  		}
> -		switch(dv->devname[0] == '/') {
> -			case 0:
> +		switch(dv->devname[0]) {
> +			default:
>  				mdfd = open_dev(dv->devname);
>  				if (mdfd >= 0) break;
> -			case 1:
> +			case '/':
>  				mdfd = open_mddev(dv->devname, 1);  
>  		}
>  		if (mdfd>=0) {

While I agree the original code is ugly, I am not convinced your
replacement is a lot prettier.

Thanks,
Jes

Re: [PATCH 2/2] mdadm.c: fix compile error "switch condition has boolean value"

[Gioh Kim]

On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 11:47:28AM -0400, jes.sorensen@gmail.com wrote:
> Gioh Kim <gi-oh.kim@profitbricks.com> writes:
> > Remove a boolean expression in switch condition
> > to prevent compile error of some compilers.
> 
> Please be specific, which compile is unable to handle this?
> 
> > Signed-off-by: Gioh Kim <gi-oh.kim@profitbricks.com>
> > ---
> >  mdadm.c | 6 +++---
> >  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/mdadm.c b/mdadm.c
> > index 08ddcab..a98a051 100644
> > --- a/mdadm.c
> > +++ b/mdadm.c
> > @@ -1905,11 +1905,11 @@ static int misc_list(struct mddev_dev *devlist,
> >  			rv |= SetAction(dv->devname, c->action);
> >  			continue;
> >  		}
> > -		switch(dv->devname[0] == '/') {
> > -			case 0:
> > +		switch(dv->devname[0]) {
> > +			default:
> >  				mdfd = open_dev(dv->devname);
> >  				if (mdfd >= 0) break;
> > -			case 1:
> > +			case '/':
> >  				mdfd = open_mddev(dv->devname, 1);  
> >  		}
> >  		if (mdfd>=0) {
> 
> While I agree the original code is ugly, I am not convinced your
> replacement is a lot prettier.
> 

Yes, it's not elegant ;-)
Following is my compiler version and error message.

gohkim@ws00837:~$ gcc -v
Using built-in specs.
COLLECT_GCC=gcc
COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-linux-gnu/5/lto-wrapper
Target: x86_64-linux-gnu
Configured with: ../src/configure -v --with-pkgversion='Ubuntu
5.2.1-22ubuntu2' --with-bugurl=file:///usr/share/doc/gcc-5/README.Bugs
--enable-languages=c,ada,c++,java,go,d,fortran,objc,obj-c++ --prefix=/usr
--program-suffix=-5 --enable-shared --enable-linker-build-id
--libexecdir=/usr/lib --without-included-gettext --enable-threads=posix
--libdir=/usr/lib --enable-nls --with-sysroot=/ --enable-clocale=gnu
--enable-libstdcxx-debug --enable-libstdcxx-time=yes
--with-default-libstdcxx-abi=new --enable-gnu-unique-object
--disable-vtable-verify --enable-libmpx --enable-plugin --with-system-zlib
--disable-browser-plugin --enable-java-awt=gtk --enable-gtk-cairo
--with-java-home=/usr/lib/jvm/java-1.5.0-gcj-5-amd64/jre --enable-java-home
--with-jvm-root-dir=/usr/lib/jvm/java-1.5.0-gcj-5-amd64
--with-jvm-jar-dir=/usr/lib/jvm-exports/java-1.5.0-gcj-5-amd64
--with-arch-directory=amd64 --with-ecj-jar=/usr/share/java/eclipse-ecj.jar
--enable-objc-gc --enable-multiarch --disable-werror --with-arch-32=i686
--with-abi=m64 --with-multilib-list=m32,m64,mx32 --enable-multilib
--with-tune=generic --enable-checking=release --build=x86_64-linux-gnu
--host=x86_64-linux-gnu --target=x86_64-linux-gnu
Thread model: posix
gcc version 5.2.1 20151010 (Ubuntu 5.2.1-22ubuntu2) 

gohkim@ws00837:~/work/tools/mdadm-mainstream$ make
cc -Wall -Werror -Wstrict-prototypes -Wextra -Wno-unused-parameter -ggdb
-DSendmail=\""/usr/sbin/sendmail -t"\" -DCONFFILE=\"/etc/mdadm.conf\"
-DCONFFILE2=\"/etc/mdadm/mdadm.conf\" -DMAP_DIR=\"/run/mdadm\"
-DMAP_FILE=\"map\" -DMDMON_DIR=\"/run/mdadm\"
-DFAILED_SLOTS_DIR=\"/run/mdadm/failed-slots\" -DNO_COROSYNC -DNO_DLM
-DVERSION=\"4.0-25-gddb13a5\" -DVERS_DATE="\"2017-03-29\"" -DUSE_PTHREADS
-DBINDIR=\"/sbin\"  -c -o mdadm.o mdadm.c
mdadm.c: In function ��misc_list��:
mdadm.c:1908:10: error: switch condition has boolean value
[-Werror=switch-bool]
   switch(dv->devname[0] == '/') {
             ^
             cc1: all warnings being treated as errors
             <builtin>: recipe for target 'mdadm.o' failed
             make: *** [mdadm.o] Error 1


-- 
Best regards,
Gi-Oh Kim
TEL: 0176 2697 8962

Re: [PATCH 2/2] mdadm.c: fix compile error "switch condition has boolean value"

[NeilBrown]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1211 bytes --]

On Thu, Mar 30 2017, jes.sorensen@gmail.com wrote:

> Gioh Kim <gi-oh.kim@profitbricks.com> writes:
>> Remove a boolean expression in switch condition
>> to prevent compile error of some compilers.
>
> Please be specific, which compile is unable to handle this?
>
>> Signed-off-by: Gioh Kim <gi-oh.kim@profitbricks.com>
>> ---
>>  mdadm.c | 6 +++---
>>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/mdadm.c b/mdadm.c
>> index 08ddcab..a98a051 100644
>> --- a/mdadm.c
>> +++ b/mdadm.c
>> @@ -1905,11 +1905,11 @@ static int misc_list(struct mddev_dev *devlist,
>>  			rv |= SetAction(dv->devname, c->action);
>>  			continue;
>>  		}
>> -		switch(dv->devname[0] == '/') {
>> -			case 0:
>> +		switch(dv->devname[0]) {
>> +			default:
>>  				mdfd = open_dev(dv->devname);
>>  				if (mdfd >= 0) break;
>> -			case 1:
>> +			case '/':
>>  				mdfd = open_mddev(dv->devname, 1);  
>>  		}
>>  		if (mdfd>=0) {
>
> While I agree the original code is ugly, I am not convinced your
> replacement is a lot prettier.
>

Maybe

		if (dv->devname[0] == '/' ||
		    (mdfd = open_dev(dv->devname)) < 0)
				mdfd = open_mddev(dv->devname, 1);

??
NeilBrown

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 832 bytes --]

Re: [PATCH 2/2] mdadm.c: fix compile error "switch condition has boolean value"

[Gioh Kim]

On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 08:38:35AM +1100, NeilBrown wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 30 2017, jes.sorensen@gmail.com wrote:
> 
> > Gioh Kim <gi-oh.kim@profitbricks.com> writes:
> >> Remove a boolean expression in switch condition
> >> to prevent compile error of some compilers.
> >
> > Please be specific, which compile is unable to handle this?
> >
> >> Signed-off-by: Gioh Kim <gi-oh.kim@profitbricks.com>
> >> ---
> >>  mdadm.c | 6 +++---
> >>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/mdadm.c b/mdadm.c
> >> index 08ddcab..a98a051 100644
> >> --- a/mdadm.c
> >> +++ b/mdadm.c
> >> @@ -1905,11 +1905,11 @@ static int misc_list(struct mddev_dev *devlist,
> >>  			rv |= SetAction(dv->devname, c->action);
> >>  			continue;
> >>  		}
> >> -		switch(dv->devname[0] == '/') {
> >> -			case 0:
> >> +		switch(dv->devname[0]) {
> >> +			default:
> >>  				mdfd = open_dev(dv->devname);
> >>  				if (mdfd >= 0) break;
> >> -			case 1:
> >> +			case '/':
> >>  				mdfd = open_mddev(dv->devname, 1);  
> >>  		}
> >>  		if (mdfd>=0) {
> >
> > While I agree the original code is ugly, I am not convinced your
> > replacement is a lot prettier.
> >
> 
> Maybe
> 
> 		if (dv->devname[0] == '/' ||
> 		    (mdfd = open_dev(dv->devname)) < 0)
> 				mdfd = open_mddev(dv->devname, 1);
> 
> ??
> NeilBrown

Yes, the initial version I thought was:

if (dev->devname[0] != '/')
    mdfd = open_dev(dv->devname);
if (dev->devname[0] == '/' || mdfd < 0)
    mdfd = open_mddev(dv->devname, 1);

But I thought you have a reason to use switch-case expression,
so I kept switch-case.
If you agree, I'll send v2 patch using if-expression.

-- 
Best regards,
Gi-Oh Kim
TEL: 0176 2697 8962

Re: [PATCH 2/2] mdadm.c: fix compile error "switch condition has boolean value"

[Jes Sorensen]

On 03/30/2017 03:52 AM, Gioh Kim wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 08:38:35AM +1100, NeilBrown wrote:
>> On Thu, Mar 30 2017, jes.sorensen@gmail.com wrote:
>>
>>> Gioh Kim <gi-oh.kim@profitbricks.com> writes:
>>>> Remove a boolean expression in switch condition
>>>> to prevent compile error of some compilers.
>>>
>>> Please be specific, which compile is unable to handle this?
>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Gioh Kim <gi-oh.kim@profitbricks.com>
>>>> ---
>>>>  mdadm.c | 6 +++---
>>>>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/mdadm.c b/mdadm.c
>>>> index 08ddcab..a98a051 100644
>>>> --- a/mdadm.c
>>>> +++ b/mdadm.c
>>>> @@ -1905,11 +1905,11 @@ static int misc_list(struct mddev_dev *devlist,
>>>>  			rv |= SetAction(dv->devname, c->action);
>>>>  			continue;
>>>>  		}
>>>> -		switch(dv->devname[0] == '/') {
>>>> -			case 0:
>>>> +		switch(dv->devname[0]) {
>>>> +			default:
>>>>  				mdfd = open_dev(dv->devname);
>>>>  				if (mdfd >= 0) break;
>>>> -			case 1:
>>>> +			case '/':
>>>>  				mdfd = open_mddev(dv->devname, 1);
>>>>  		}
>>>>  		if (mdfd>=0) {
>>>
>>> While I agree the original code is ugly, I am not convinced your
>>> replacement is a lot prettier.
>>>
>>
>> Maybe
>>
>> 		if (dv->devname[0] == '/' ||
>> 		    (mdfd = open_dev(dv->devname)) < 0)
>> 				mdfd = open_mddev(dv->devname, 1);
>>
>> ??
>> NeilBrown
>
> Yes, the initial version I thought was:
>
> if (dev->devname[0] != '/')
>     mdfd = open_dev(dv->devname);
> if (dev->devname[0] == '/' || mdfd < 0)
>     mdfd = open_mddev(dv->devname, 1);
>
> But I thought you have a reason to use switch-case expression,
> so I kept switch-case.
> If you agree, I'll send v2 patch using if-expression.
>

I like this solution better, I much favor code that is more explicit in 
what it does. Request less brain capacity for me to read :)

Cheers,
Jes