@@ -187,8 +187,8 @@ static const unsigned long long numbers[] __initconst = {
#define value_representable_in_type(T, val) \
(is_signed_type(T) \
? ((long long)(val) >= type_min(T)) && ((long long)(val) <= type_max(T)) \
- : ((unsigned long long)(val) >= type_min(T)) && \
- ((unsigned long long)(val) <= type_max(T)))
+ : ((unsigned long long)(val) <= type_max(T)))
+
#define test_one_number(T, gen_fmt, scan_fmt, val, fn) \
do { \
@@ -204,12 +204,11 @@ do { \
int i; \
\
for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(numbers); i++) { \
- if (!value_representable_in_type(T, numbers[i])) \
- continue; \
+ if (value_representable_in_type(T, numbers[i])) \
+ test_one_number(T, gen_fmt, scan_fmt, \
+ numbers[i], fn); \
\
- test_one_number(T, gen_fmt, scan_fmt, numbers[i], fn); \
- \
- if (is_signed_type(T)) \
+ if (value_representable_in_type(T, -numbers[i])) \
test_one_number(T, gen_fmt, scan_fmt, \
-numbers[i], fn); \
} \
sparse was producing warnings of the form: sparse: cast truncates bits from constant value (ffff0001 becomes 1) There is no actual problem here. Using type_min() on an unsigned type results in an (expected) truncation. However, there is no need to test an unsigned value against type_min(). The minimum value of an unsigned is obviously 0, and any value cast to an unsigned type is >= 0, so for unsigneds only type_max() need be tested. This patch also takes the opportunity to clean up the implementation of simple_numbers_loop() to use a common pattern for the positive and negative test. Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Richard Fitzgerald <rf@opensource.cirrus.com> --- lib/test_scanf.c | 13 ++++++------- 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)