On Mon, 2019-08-05 at 18:39 +0530, Vaibhav Jain wrote:
> Thanks for reviewing this patch Vishal. I have prepped a v2 adressing
> all your review comments with one exception below:

No problem, thanks for fixing this.

> 
> "Verma, Vishal L" <[email protected]> writes:
> 
> > On Thu, 2019-07-04 at 08:21 +0530, Vaibhav Jain wrote:
> > > 
> > 
> > > + if (addr != MAP_FAILED)
> > > +         addr = (void *) ((uintptr_t)addr + shift);
> > 
> > The (uintptr_t) cast should be ok to drop, for v66 we are removing
> > the
> > pointer arithmatic warning:
> > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11062697/
> > 
> > In fact, since 'shift' is in bytes, isn't an unsigned int cast
> > actually *wrong*?
> Not sure if I understand your review comment correctly. With uintptr_t
> cast and 'shift' in bytes, addr will be assigned 'addr + shift'
> instead
> of 'addr + shift * sizeof (unsigned int)'
> 
> So I think the arithmetic I am doing here is correct.
> 
Yes you're right - I conflated a (uintptr_t) cast with an (unsigned int)
cast. The latter would actually be wrong, but I see now that uintptr_t
is correct. However, given the above patch where we drop the pointer
arithmetic warning, I think it should be OK to manipulate the void
pointer directly, and this makes the line cleaner and more concise.

Thanks,
        -Vishal


_______________________________________________
Linux-nvdimm mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-nvdimm

Reply via email to