From: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
Date: Mon, 5 Nov 2018 14:34:04 +0000 (-0500)
Subject: XArray tests: Correct some 64-bit assumptions
X-Git-Tag: rel_imx_5.10.35_2.0.0-somdevices.0~5871^2~7
X-Git-Url: https://git.somdevices.com/?a=commitdiff_plain;h=5404a7f1c21cfda061712bedf2d06cc0f6c755e9;p=linux.git

XArray tests: Correct some 64-bit assumptions

The test-suite caught these two mistakes when compiled for 32-bit.
I had only been running the test-suite in 64-bit mode.

Signed-off-by: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
---

diff --git a/lib/test_xarray.c b/lib/test_xarray.c
index e5294b20b52f..5f9c14e975a4 100644
--- a/lib/test_xarray.c
+++ b/lib/test_xarray.c
@@ -504,7 +504,7 @@ static noinline void check_multi_store(struct xarray *xa)
 	rcu_read_unlock();
 
 	/* We can erase multiple values with a single store */
-	xa_store_order(xa, 0, 63, NULL, GFP_KERNEL);
+	xa_store_order(xa, 0, BITS_PER_LONG - 1, NULL, GFP_KERNEL);
 	XA_BUG_ON(xa, !xa_empty(xa));
 
 	/* Even when the first slot is empty but the others aren't */
@@ -1101,7 +1101,7 @@ static noinline void check_store_range(struct xarray *xa)
 			__check_store_range(xa, 4095 + i, 4095 + j);
 			__check_store_range(xa, 4096 + i, 4096 + j);
 			__check_store_range(xa, 123456 + i, 123456 + j);
-			__check_store_range(xa, UINT_MAX + i, UINT_MAX + j);
+			__check_store_range(xa, (1 << 24) + i, (1 << 24) + j);
 		}
 	}
 }