Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH net-next 2/2] tuntap: XDP transmission | From | Jason Wang <> | Date | Tue, 2 Jan 2018 11:32:08 +0800 |
| |
On 2018年01月01日 11:55, Joe Perches wrote: > On Mon, 2018-01-01 at 11:48 +0800, kbuild test robot wrote: >> Hi Jason, >> >> I love your patch! Perhaps something to improve: >> >> [auto build test WARNING on net-next/master] >> >> url: https://github.com/0day-ci/linux/commits/Jason-Wang/XDP-transmission-for-tuntap/20180101-105946 >> config: i386-randconfig-x072-201800 (attached as .config) >> compiler: gcc-7 (Debian 7.2.0-12) 7.2.1 20171025 >> reproduce: >> # save the attached .config to linux build tree >> make ARCH=i386 >> >> All warnings (new ones prefixed by >>): >> >> drivers//net/tun.c: In function 'tun_xdp_to_ptr': >>>> drivers//net/tun.c:251:9: warning: cast to pointer from integer of different size [-Wint-to-pointer-cast] >> return (void *)((unsigned long)ptr | TUN_XDP_FLAG); >> ^ >> drivers//net/tun.c: In function 'tun_ptr_to_xdp': >> drivers//net/tun.c:257:9: warning: cast to pointer from integer of different size [-Wint-to-pointer-cast] >> return (void *)((unsigned long)ptr & ~TUN_XDP_FLAG); >> ^ >> >> vim +251 drivers//net/tun.c >> >> 248 >> 249 void *tun_xdp_to_ptr(void *ptr) >> 250 { >> > 251 return (void *)((unsigned long)ptr | TUN_XDP_FLAG); > Does TUN_XDP_FLAG really need to be 0x1ULL? > Wouldn't 0x1UL suffice? >
0x1UL should be fine.
Thanks
| |