Re: [PATCH] 2.6.0-test9 ioctl compile warnings in userspace
From: Jörn Engel
Date: Wed Dec 03 2003 - 07:57:56 EST
On Tue, 2 December 2003 12:43:50 +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 12, 2003 at 05:37:50PM +0100, Johannes Stezenbach wrote:
> > Hi,
> > the patch below fixes
> > warning: signed and unsigned type in conditional expression
> > when compiling userspace programs with a glibc built against
> > 2.6 kernel headers.
> > This is a better version of my previous patch which aims
> > to fix all affected architectures.
> I am curious about this.
> This patch has been proposed since almost a month or more now, and
> clearly nobody seems to care about this, since it didn't make it in the
> 2.6.0-test11 tarball (don't know about more recent bk trees though) nor
> do the debian glibc maintainer judge the issue important enough to act
> on it (despite it breaking buildage of other packages).
> So, is there a reason why not to solve this problem this way, or a
> particular reason why __invalid_size_argument_for_IOC is still int and
> not unsigned int ?
It doesn't clearly fix a bug, afaics. Also, most kernel hackers don't
care too much about the signed/unsigned warnings, as they are 99%
Resend the patch after 2.6.0 has been released, I don't see any change
for it to go in before.
People will accept your ideas much more readily if you tell them
that Benjamin Franklin said it first.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/