Balbir Singh <bsinghar...@gmail.com> writes: > On Sun, Feb 17, 2019 at 07:34:20PM +1100, Michael Ellerman wrote: >> Balbir Singh <bsinghar...@gmail.com> writes: >> > On Sat, Feb 16, 2019 at 08:22:12AM -0600, Segher Boessenkool wrote: >> >> On Sat, Feb 16, 2019 at 09:55:11PM +1100, Balbir Singh wrote: >> >> > On Thu, Feb 14, 2019 at 05:23:39PM +1100, Michael Ellerman wrote: >> >> > > In v4.20 we changed our pgd/pud_present() to check for _PAGE_PRESENT >> >> > > rather than just checking that the value is non-zero, e.g.: >> >> > > >> >> > > static inline int pgd_present(pgd_t pgd) >> >> > > { >> >> > > - return !pgd_none(pgd); >> >> > > + return (pgd_raw(pgd) & cpu_to_be64(_PAGE_PRESENT)); >> >> > > } >> >> > > >> >> > > Unfortunately this is broken on big endian, as the result of the >> >> > > bitwise && is truncated to int, which is always zero because >> >> >> >> (Bitwise "&" of course). >> >> >> >> > Not sure why that should happen, why is the result an int? What >> >> > causes the casting of pgd_t & be64 to be truncated to an int. >> >> >> >> Yes, it's not obvious as written... It's simply that the return type of >> >> pgd_present is int. So it is truncated _after_ the bitwise and. >> >> >> > >> > Thanks, I am surprised the compiler does not complain about the truncation >> > of bits. I wonder if we are missing -Wconversion >> >> Good luck with that :) >> >> What I should start doing is building with it enabled and then comparing >> the output before and after commits to make sure we're not introducing >> new cases. > > Fair enough, my point was that the compiler can help out. I'll see what > -Wconversion finds on my local build :)
I get about 43MB of warnings here :) cheers