Re: [GIT PULL] block updates for 2.6.31-rc1
From: Andrew Morton
Date: Wed Jun 17 2009 - 18:18:38 EST
On Tue, 16 Jun 2009 09:18:23 +0200
Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Martin K. Petersen (1):
> block: Introduce helper to reset queue limits to default values
block/blk-settings.c: In function 'blk_set_default_limits':
block/blk-settings.c:115: warning: large integer implicitly truncated to unsigned type
The patch was sent on June 12, acked on June 15, merged into mainline
June 16 and never made an appearance in linux-next.
It doesn't look like it'll cause any runtime problems, but that just
means we got lucky.
Suggested fix is to use plain old "-1", rather than (incorrectly)
guessing what type the caller might be assigning to.
@@ -702,7 +702,7 @@ extern unsigned long blk_max_low_pfn, bl
#define BLK_BOUNCE_HIGH -1ULL
-#define BLK_BOUNCE_ANY (-1ULL)
+#define BLK_BOUNCE_ANY (-1)
#define BLK_BOUNCE_ISA (ISA_DMA_THRESHOLD)
Or is the code just buggy? What are the units of BLK_BOUNCE_HIGH,
BLK_BOUNCE_ANY and BLK_BOUNCE_ISA? Seems that they are physical
addresses. So why are we copying one of these onto a variable which
If BLK_BOUNCE_ANY's units are indeed pfns (not the case afaict) then
using a ULL was inappropriate.
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/