[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190607144229.GF28398@e103592.cambridge.arm.com>
Date: Fri, 7 Jun 2019 15:42:31 +0100
From: Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@....com>
To: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
Cc: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@....com>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kvmarm@...ts.cs.columbia.edu,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] KVM: arm64: Drop 'const' from argument of vq_present()
On Fri, Jun 07, 2019 at 11:30:37AM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 04-06-19, 10:59, Dave Martin wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 04, 2019 at 10:13:19AM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> > > We currently get following compilation warning:
> > >
> > > arch/arm64/kvm/guest.c: In function 'set_sve_vls':
> > > arch/arm64/kvm/guest.c:262:18: warning: passing argument 1 of 'vq_present' from incompatible pointer type
> > > arch/arm64/kvm/guest.c:212:13: note: expected 'const u64 (* const)[8]' but argument is of type 'u64 (*)[8]'
> > >
> > > The argument can't be const, as it is copied at runtime using
> > > copy_from_user(). Drop const from the prototype of vq_present().
> > >
> > > Fixes: 9033bba4b535 ("KVM: arm64/sve: Add pseudo-register for the guest's vector lengths")
> > > Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
> > > ---
> > > arch/arm64/kvm/guest.c | 2 +-
> > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/guest.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/guest.c
> > > index 3ae2f82fca46..78f5a4f45e0a 100644
> > > --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/guest.c
> > > +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/guest.c
> > > @@ -209,7 +209,7 @@ static int set_core_reg(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, const struct kvm_one_reg *reg)
> > > #define vq_mask(vq) ((u64)1 << ((vq) - SVE_VQ_MIN) % 64)
> > >
> > > static bool vq_present(
> > > - const u64 (*const vqs)[KVM_ARM64_SVE_VLS_WORDS],
> > > + u64 (*const vqs)[KVM_ARM64_SVE_VLS_WORDS],
> > > unsigned int vq)
> > > {
> > > return (*vqs)[vq_word(vq)] & vq_mask(vq);
> >
> > Ack, but maybe this should just be converted to a macro?
>
> I will send a patch with that if that's what you want.
I think this would solve the problem and simplify the code a bit at the
same time.
So go for it.
Cheers
---Dave
Powered by blists - more mailing lists