Re: [PATCH 5/6] fix warning on test_ti_thread_flag()
From: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>
Date: 2006-01-25 12:32:41
Also in:
linux-mips, lkml, sparclinux
On Wed, 25 Jan 2006, Akinobu Mita wrote:
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
If the arechitecture is - BITS_PER_LONG == 64 - struct thread_info.flag 32 is bits - second argument of test_bit() was void * Then compiler print error message on test_ti_thread_flags() in include/linux/thread_info.h Signed-off-by: Akinobu Mita <redacted> --- thread_info.h | 2 +- 1 files changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) Index: 2.6-git/include/linux/thread_info.h ===================================================================--- 2.6-git.orig/include/linux/thread_info.h 2006-01-25 19:07:12.000000000 +0900 +++ 2.6-git/include/linux/thread_info.h 2006-01-25 19:14:26.000000000 +0900@@ -49,7 +49,7 @@ static inline int test_ti_thread_flag(struct thread_info *ti, int flag) { - return test_bit(flag,&ti->flags); + return test_bit(flag, (void *)&ti->flags); }
This is not safe. The bitops are defined to work on unsigned long only, so
flags should be changed to unsigned long instead, or you should use a
temporary.
Affected platforms:
- alpha: flags is unsigned int
- ia64, sh, x86_64: flags is __u32
The only affected 64-platforms are little endian, so it will silently work
after your change, though...
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds