: Changed msg_set_bits params type
Subsystems (3)
PATCH 1/1 : Changed msg_set_bits params type
To ease use of sparse, as requested by Ingo Oeser.
---net/tipc/msg.h | 2 +-
1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
net/tipc/msg.h +0 -0
@@ -69,7 +69,7 @@ static inline void msg_set_word(struct tipc_msg *m, u32 w, u32 val)
}
static inline void msg_set_bits(struct tipc_msg *m, u32 w,
- u32 pos, u32 mask, u32 val)
+ u32 pos, __be32 mask, __be32 val)
{
val = (val & mask) << pos;
val = htonl(val);--
1.5.0.5
///jon
David Miller
maintainerFrom: Jon Paul Maloy <[email protected]>
Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2007 15:57:55 -0400
Quoted 3 lines
To ease use of sparse, as requested by Ingo Oeser.
Signed-off-by Jon Paul Maloy <[email protected]>
Did you actually run sparse to see what warnings this change adds or deletes or are you submitting untested changes?
Quoted 4 lines · David Miller
Did you actually run sparse to see what warnings this change adds or deletes or are you submitting untested changes?
I did, and I am aware that sparse shows several warnings for TIPC, which we will have to fix this asap, of course. The patched line did not show up in the warning list, which along with a full regression test made me conclude that we didn't introduce a problem, at least. I see now that it didn't cause a warning before the change either, so I was probably too quick to try to please people. You can can ignore the patch if you want to, but it is safe.
///jon
David Miller
maintainerFrom: Jon Paul Maloy <[email protected]>
Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2007 19:50:42 -0400
Quoted 5 lines
Quoted 4 lines · David Miller
Did you actually run sparse to see what warnings this change adds or deletes or are you submitting untested changes?
Quoted 8 lines
I did, and I am aware that sparse shows several warnings for TIPC, which we will have to fix this asap, of course. The patched line did not show up in the warning list, which along with a full regression test made me conclude that we didn't introduce a problem, at least. I see now that it didn't cause a warning before the change either, so I was probably too quick to try to please people. You can can ignore the patch if you want to, but it is safe.
Thanks for clarifying, but your email client corrupted the patch by mangling the whitespace and adding newlines to break up long lines.
I feel like I write this to somebody every single day, but could you please email patches to yourself and test that they actually apply instead of wasting my time like this?