Re: [PATCH 1/5] perf: fix broken union in perf_event_mmap_page

[Peter Zijlstra]

On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 04:22:17PM +0300, Adrian Hunter wrote:
> The capabilities bits must not be "union'ed" together.
> Put them in a separate struct.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>  include/uapi/linux/perf_event.h | 8 +++++---
>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/perf_event.h b/include/uapi/linux/perf_event.h
> index 0b1df41..19f6ee5 100644
> --- a/include/uapi/linux/perf_event.h
> +++ b/include/uapi/linux/perf_event.h
> @@ -375,9 +375,11 @@ struct perf_event_mmap_page {
>  	__u64	time_running;		/* time event on cpu */
>  	union {
>  		__u64	capabilities;
> -		__u64	cap_usr_time  : 1,
> -			cap_usr_rdpmc : 1,
> -			cap_____res   : 62;
> +		struct {
> +			__u64	cap_usr_time		: 1,
> +				cap_usr_rdpmc		: 1,
> +				cap_____res		: 62;
> +		};
>  	};

Ick, it did that!? and here I thought there was a difference between:

  int foo:1,
      bar:1;

and

  int foo:1;
  int bar:1;

That made all the difference in this particular case. I guess I should
go read the language spec more carefully next time.
--
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/