* [PATCH] [RESEND] nfs: blocklayout: avoid warnings on 32-bit sector_t
@ 2017-07-21 20:15 Arnd Bergmann
2017-07-24 7:57 ` Christoph Hellwig
0 siblings, 1 reply; 2+ messages in thread
From: Arnd Bergmann @ 2017-07-21 20:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Trond Myklebust, Anna Schumaker
Cc: Arnd Bergmann, Benjamin Coddington, Alexey Dobriyan, Jens Axboe,
Andrew Morton, linux-nfs, linux-kernel
sector_t can be either 32-bit or 64-bit wide, but in the former
case, the NFS blocklayout code produces a couple of warnings:
blocklayout.c: In function 'bl_read_pagelist':
blocklayout.c:225:45: error: large integer implicitly truncated to unsigned type [-Werror=overflow]
struct pnfs_block_dev_map map = { .start = NFS4_MAX_UINT64 };
^
blocklayout.c:282:16: error: large integer implicitly truncated to unsigned type [-Werror=overflow]
map.start = NFS4_MAX_UINT64;
^
blocklayout.c: In function 'bl_write_pagelist':
blocklayout.c:368:45: error: large integer implicitly truncated to unsigned type [-Werror=overflow]
struct pnfs_block_dev_map map = { .start = NFS4_MAX_UINT64 };
^
blocklayout.c: In function 'bl_free_layout_hdr':
blocklayout.c:443:37: error: large integer implicitly truncated to unsigned type [-Werror=overflow]
err = ext_tree_remove(bl, true, 0, LLONG_MAX);
^
blocklayout.c: In function 'bl_return_range':
blocklayout.c:708:9: error: large integer implicitly truncated to unsigned type [-Werror=overflow]
end = round_down(NFS4_MAX_UINT64, PAGE_SIZE);
In all instances, NFS4_MAX_UINT64 is meant to just refer to the largest
representable unsigned integer, and the warning is for the implicit
type conversiont to a smaller type. As the conversion is ok, we
can use an explict cast to stop the warning.
Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Fixes: 5c83746a0cf2 ("pnfs/blocklayout: in-kernel GETDEVICEINFO XDR parsing")
---
I sent this on Jan 25 2016 but got no reply while the problem
remains in linux-4.6-rc1. Please apply.
---
fs/nfs/blocklayout/blocklayout.c | 10 +++++-----
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/nfs/blocklayout/blocklayout.c b/fs/nfs/blocklayout/blocklayout.c
index d8863a804b15..52044865c40b 100644
--- a/fs/nfs/blocklayout/blocklayout.c
+++ b/fs/nfs/blocklayout/blocklayout.c
@@ -224,7 +224,7 @@ static enum pnfs_try_status
bl_read_pagelist(struct nfs_pgio_header *header)
{
struct pnfs_block_layout *bl = BLK_LSEG2EXT(header->lseg);
- struct pnfs_block_dev_map map = { .start = NFS4_MAX_UINT64 };
+ struct pnfs_block_dev_map map = { .start = (sector_t)NFS4_MAX_UINT64 };
struct bio *bio = NULL;
struct pnfs_block_extent be;
sector_t isect, extent_length = 0;
@@ -281,7 +281,7 @@ bl_read_pagelist(struct nfs_pgio_header *header)
zero_user_segment(pages[i], pg_offset, pg_len);
/* invalidate map */
- map.start = NFS4_MAX_UINT64;
+ map.start = (sector_t)NFS4_MAX_UINT64;
} else {
bio = do_add_page_to_bio(bio,
header->page_array.npages - i,
@@ -368,7 +368,7 @@ static enum pnfs_try_status
bl_write_pagelist(struct nfs_pgio_header *header, int sync)
{
struct pnfs_block_layout *bl = BLK_LSEG2EXT(header->lseg);
- struct pnfs_block_dev_map map = { .start = NFS4_MAX_UINT64 };
+ struct pnfs_block_dev_map map = { .start = (sector_t)NFS4_MAX_UINT64 };
struct bio *bio = NULL;
struct pnfs_block_extent be;
sector_t isect, extent_length = 0;
@@ -443,7 +443,7 @@ static void bl_free_layout_hdr(struct pnfs_layout_hdr *lo)
dprintk("%s enter\n", __func__);
- err = ext_tree_remove(bl, true, 0, LLONG_MAX);
+ err = ext_tree_remove(bl, true, 0, (sector_t)LLONG_MAX);
WARN_ON(err);
kfree(bl);
@@ -721,7 +721,7 @@ bl_return_range(struct pnfs_layout_hdr *lo,
end = offset + (range->length >> SECTOR_SHIFT);
} else {
- end = round_down(NFS4_MAX_UINT64, PAGE_SIZE);
+ end = round_down((sector_t)NFS4_MAX_UINT64, PAGE_SIZE);
}
ext_tree_remove(bl, range->iomode & IOMODE_RW, offset, end);
--
2.9.0
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] [RESEND] nfs: blocklayout: avoid warnings on 32-bit sector_t
2017-07-21 20:15 [PATCH] [RESEND] nfs: blocklayout: avoid warnings on 32-bit sector_t Arnd Bergmann
@ 2017-07-24 7:57 ` Christoph Hellwig
0 siblings, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: Christoph Hellwig @ 2017-07-24 7:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Arnd Bergmann
Cc: Trond Myklebust, Anna Schumaker, Benjamin Coddington,
Alexey Dobriyan, Jens Axboe, Andrew Morton, linux-nfs,
linux-kernel
A 32-bit will also cause run-time problems. I think the block layout
code should instead grow a
depends on 64BIT || LBDAF
to ensure we always have a 64-bit sector_t.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2017-07-24 7:58 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2017-07-21 20:15 [PATCH] [RESEND] nfs: blocklayout: avoid warnings on 32-bit sector_t Arnd Bergmann
2017-07-24 7:57 ` Christoph Hellwig
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).