From: Andrew Jones <drjones@redhat.com>
To: Bill Wendling <morbo@google.com>
Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, Nikos Nikoleris <nikos.nikoleris@arm.com>,
lvivier@redhat.com, thuth@redhat.com, frankja@linux.ibm.com,
imbrenda@linux.ibm.com, david@redhat.com, pbonzini@redhat.com,
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org,
linux-s390@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [kvm-unit-tests PATCH] libfdt: use logical "or" instead of bitwise "or" with boolean operands
Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2022 07:43:56 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220316074356.n7e5lzrmnal2dcgu@gator> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220316060214.2200695-1-morbo@google.com>
On Tue, Mar 15, 2022 at 11:02:14PM -0700, Bill Wendling wrote:
> Clang warns about using a bitwise '|' with boolean operands. This seems
> to be due to a small typo.
>
> lib/libfdt/fdt_rw.c:438:6: warning: use of bitwise '|' with boolean operands [-Werror,-Wbitwise-instead-of-logical]
> if (can_assume(LIBFDT_ORDER) |
>
> Using '||' removes this warnings.
>
> Signed-off-by: Bill Wendling <morbo@google.com>
> ---
> lib/libfdt/fdt_rw.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/lib/libfdt/fdt_rw.c b/lib/libfdt/fdt_rw.c
> index 13854253ff86..3320e5559cac 100644
> --- a/lib/libfdt/fdt_rw.c
> +++ b/lib/libfdt/fdt_rw.c
> @@ -435,7 +435,7 @@ int fdt_open_into(const void *fdt, void *buf, int bufsize)
> return struct_size;
> }
>
> - if (can_assume(LIBFDT_ORDER) |
> + if (can_assume(LIBFDT_ORDER) ||
> !fdt_blocks_misordered_(fdt, mem_rsv_size, struct_size)) {
> /* no further work necessary */
> err = fdt_move(fdt, buf, bufsize);
> --
> 2.35.1.723.g4982287a31-goog
>
This is fixed in libfdt upstream with commit 7be250b4 ("libfdt:
Correct condition for reordering blocks"), which is in v1.6.1.
We can either take this patch as a backport of 7be250b4 or we
can rebase all of our libfdt to v1.6.1. Based on the number of
fixes in v1.6.1, which appear to be mostly for compiling with
later compilers, I'm in favor of rebasing.
Actually, we can also use this opportunity to [re]visit the
idea of changing libfdt to a git submodule. I'd like to hear
opinions on that.
Thanks,
drew
next parent reply other threads:[~2022-03-16 7:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20220316060214.2200695-1-morbo@google.com>
2022-03-16 7:43 ` Andrew Jones [this message]
2022-03-16 7:53 ` [kvm-unit-tests PATCH] libfdt: use logical "or" instead of bitwise "or" with boolean operands Thomas Huth
2022-03-16 18:49 ` Bill Wendling
2022-03-18 9:36 ` Andrew Jones
2022-03-18 13:41 ` Andrew Jones
2022-03-22 13:44 ` Thomas Huth
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20220316074356.n7e5lzrmnal2dcgu@gator \
--to=drjones@redhat.com \
--cc=david@redhat.com \
--cc=frankja@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=imbrenda@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu \
--cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lvivier@redhat.com \
--cc=morbo@google.com \
--cc=nikos.nikoleris@arm.com \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=thuth@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).