Re: [PATCH] Btrfs: fix compile warning from __btrfs_map_block
On 03/31/2011 08:10 PM, Chris Mason wrote:
> Excerpts from liubo's message of 2011-03-31 05:45:20 -0400:
>> While compile btrfs modules on 32bit box, I encounter the following:
>>
>> WARNING: "__umoddi3" [fs/btrfs/btrfs.ko] undefined!
>>
>> The WARNING comes from that __btrfs_map_block does not use do_div() for
>> relative operations, this will cause problems on 32bit box, for values
>> with "u64" type should use do_div() instead of a direct "%".
>
> Which kernel tree was this against? I had rebased the for-linus and
> for-linus-unmerged branch to get rid of it.
>
> Sorry for the confusion.
Ah, it is my fault to neglect the version, I found this warning while compiling
the latest for-linus tree (top commit:
c1e1f82c56af1a286fd747e809c94628c2ca15fb).
thanks,
liubo
>
> -chris
>
>> Signed-off-by: Liu Bo
>> ---
>> fs/btrfs/volumes.c | 23 +++
>> 1 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/fs/btrfs/volumes.c b/fs/btrfs/volumes.c
>> index 41afd50..7b23d0f 100644
>> --- a/fs/btrfs/volumes.c
>> +++ b/fs/btrfs/volumes.c
>> @@ -3076,16 +3076,19 @@ again:
>> multi->stripes[i].dev = map->stripes[stripe_index].dev;
>>
>> if (map->type & BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_RAID0) {
>> -u64 stripes;
>> -int last_stripe = (stripe_nr_end - 1) %
>> -map->num_stripes;
>> +u64 stripes = stripe_nr_end - 1;
>> +int last_stripe = do_div(stripes,
>> +map->num_stripes);
>> int j;
>>
>> for (j = 0; j < map->num_stripes; j++) {
>> -if ((stripe_nr_end - 1 - j) %
>> - map->num_stripes == stripe_index)
>> +stripes = stripe_nr_end - 1 - j;
>> +
>> +if (do_div(stripes, map->num_stripes) ==
>> +stripe_index)
>> break;
>> }
>> +
>> stripes = stripe_nr_end - 1 - j;
>> do_div(stripes, map->num_stripes);
>> multi->stripes[i].length = map->stripe_len *
>> @@ -3100,18 +3103,22 @@ again:
>> multi->stripes[i].length -=
>> stripe_end_offset;
>> } else if (map->type & BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_RAID10) {
>> -u64 stripes;
>> +u64 stripes = stripe_nr_end - 1;
>> int j;
>> int factor = map->num_stripes /
>> map->sub_stripes;
>> -int last_stripe = (stripe_nr_end - 1) % factor;
>> +int last_stripe = do_div(stripes, factor);
>> +
>> last_stripe *= map->sub_stripes;
>>
>> for (j = 0; j < factor; j++) {
>> -if ((stripe_nr_end - 1 - j) % factor ==
>> +stripes = stripe_nr_end - 1 - j;
>> +
>> +if (do_div(stripes, factor) ==
>> stripe_index / map->sub_stripes)
>> break;
>> }
>> +
>> stripes = stripe_nr_end - 1 - j;
>> do_div(stripes, factor);
>> multi->stripes[i].length = map->stripe_len *
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
> the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: [PATCH] Btrfs: fix compile warning from __btrfs_map_block
Excerpts from liubo's message of 2011-03-31 05:45:20 -0400:
>
> While compile btrfs modules on 32bit box, I encounter the following:
>
> WARNING: "__umoddi3" [fs/btrfs/btrfs.ko] undefined!
>
> The WARNING comes from that __btrfs_map_block does not use do_div() for
> relative operations, this will cause problems on 32bit box, for values
> with "u64" type should use do_div() instead of a direct "%".
Which kernel tree was this against? I had rebased the for-linus and
for-linus-unmerged branch to get rid of it.
Sorry for the confusion.
-chris
>
> Signed-off-by: Liu Bo
> ---
> fs/btrfs/volumes.c | 23 +++
> 1 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/btrfs/volumes.c b/fs/btrfs/volumes.c
> index 41afd50..7b23d0f 100644
> --- a/fs/btrfs/volumes.c
> +++ b/fs/btrfs/volumes.c
> @@ -3076,16 +3076,19 @@ again:
> multi->stripes[i].dev = map->stripes[stripe_index].dev;
>
> if (map->type & BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_RAID0) {
> -u64 stripes;
> -int last_stripe = (stripe_nr_end - 1) %
> -map->num_stripes;
> +u64 stripes = stripe_nr_end - 1;
> +int last_stripe = do_div(stripes,
> +map->num_stripes);
> int j;
>
> for (j = 0; j < map->num_stripes; j++) {
> -if ((stripe_nr_end - 1 - j) %
> - map->num_stripes == stripe_index)
> +stripes = stripe_nr_end - 1 - j;
> +
> +if (do_div(stripes, map->num_stripes) ==
> +stripe_index)
> break;
> }
> +
> stripes = stripe_nr_end - 1 - j;
> do_div(stripes, map->num_stripes);
> multi->stripes[i].length = map->stripe_len *
> @@ -3100,18 +3103,22 @@ again:
> multi->stripes[i].length -=
> stripe_end_offset;
> } else if (map->type & BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_RAID10) {
> -u64 stripes;
> +u64 stripes = stripe_nr_end - 1;
> int j;
> int factor = map->num_stripes /
> map->sub_stripes;
> -int last_stripe = (stripe_nr_end - 1) % factor;
> +int last_stripe = do_div(stripes, factor);
> +
> last_stripe *= map->sub_stripes;
>
> for (j = 0; j < factor; j++) {
> -if ((stripe_nr_end - 1 - j) % factor ==
> +stripes = stripe_nr_end - 1 - j;
> +
> +if (do_div(stripes, factor) ==
> stripe_index / map->sub_stripes)
> break;
> }
> +
> stripes = stripe_nr_end - 1 - j;
> do_div(stripes, factor);
> multi->stripes[i].length = map->stripe_len *
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
[PATCH] Btrfs: fix compile warning from __btrfs_map_block
While compile btrfs modules on 32bit box, I encounter the following:
WARNING: "__umoddi3" [fs/btrfs/btrfs.ko] undefined!
The WARNING comes from that __btrfs_map_block does not use do_div() for
relative operations, this will cause problems on 32bit box, for values
with "u64" type should use do_div() instead of a direct "%".
Signed-off-by: Liu Bo
---
fs/btrfs/volumes.c | 23 +++
1 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/volumes.c b/fs/btrfs/volumes.c
index 41afd50..7b23d0f 100644
--- a/fs/btrfs/volumes.c
+++ b/fs/btrfs/volumes.c
@@ -3076,16 +3076,19 @@ again:
multi->stripes[i].dev = map->stripes[stripe_index].dev;
if (map->type & BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_RAID0) {
- u64 stripes;
- int last_stripe = (stripe_nr_end - 1) %
- map->num_stripes;
+ u64 stripes = stripe_nr_end - 1;
+ int last_stripe = do_div(stripes,
+ map->num_stripes);
int j;
for (j = 0; j < map->num_stripes; j++) {
- if ((stripe_nr_end - 1 - j) %
- map->num_stripes == stripe_index)
+ stripes = stripe_nr_end - 1 - j;
+
+ if (do_div(stripes, map->num_stripes) ==
+ stripe_index)
break;
}
+
stripes = stripe_nr_end - 1 - j;
do_div(stripes, map->num_stripes);
multi->stripes[i].length = map->stripe_len *
@@ -3100,18 +3103,22 @@ again:
multi->stripes[i].length -=
stripe_end_offset;
} else if (map->type & BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_RAID10) {
- u64 stripes;
+ u64 stripes = stripe_nr_end - 1;
int j;
int factor = map->num_stripes /
map->sub_stripes;
- int last_stripe = (stripe_nr_end - 1) % factor;
+ int last_stripe = do_div(stripes, factor);
+
last_stripe *= map->sub_stripes;
for (j = 0; j < factor; j++) {
- if ((stripe_nr_end - 1 - j) % factor ==
+ stripes = stripe_nr_end - 1 - j;
+
+ if (do_div(stripes, factor) ==
stripe_index / map->sub_stripes)
break;
}
+
stripes = stripe_nr_end - 1 - j;
do_div(stripes, factor);
multi->stripes[i].length = map->stripe_len *
--
1.6.5.2
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
