[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200121185834.GA3941@ubuntu-x2-xlarge-x86>
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2020 11:58:34 -0700
From: Nathan Chancellor <natechancellor@...il.com>
To: Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>
Cc: Thomas Bogendoerfer <tbogendoerfer@...e.de>,
Michael Reed <mdr@....com>,
"James E.J. Bottomley" <jejb@...ux.ibm.com>,
"Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>,
linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
clang-built-linux <clang-built-linux@...glegroups.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] scsi: qla1280: Fix a use of QLA_64BIT_PTR
On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 10:43:06AM -0800, Nick Desaulniers wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 20, 2020 at 11:00 AM Nathan Chancellor
> <natechancellor@...il.com> wrote:
> >
> > Clang warns:
> >
> > ../drivers/scsi/qla1280.c:1702:5: warning: 'QLA_64BIT_PTR' is not
> > defined, evaluates to 0 [-Wundef]
> > if QLA_64BIT_PTR
> > ^
> > 1 warning generated.
> >
> > The rest of this driver uses #ifdef QLA_64BIT_PTR, do the same thing at
> > this site to remove this warning.
> >
> > Fixes: ba304e5b4498 ("scsi: qla1280: Fix dma firmware download, if dma address is 64bit")
>
> ^ The above SHA is valid only in linux-next. Won't it change when
> merged into mainline?
Not unless Martin rebases his tree (in which case, this patch should
just be folded into the original one).
> > Link: https://github.com/ClangBuiltLinux/linux/issues/843
> > Signed-off-by: Nathan Chancellor <natechancellor@...il.com>
>
> Thanks for the patch.
> Reviewed-by: Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>
Thanks for the review :)
> > ---
> > drivers/scsi/qla1280.c | 2 +-
> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/scsi/qla1280.c b/drivers/scsi/qla1280.c
> > index 607cbddcdd14..3337cd341d21 100644
> > --- a/drivers/scsi/qla1280.c
> > +++ b/drivers/scsi/qla1280.c
> > @@ -1699,7 +1699,7 @@ qla1280_load_firmware_pio(struct scsi_qla_host *ha)
> > return err;
> > }
> >
> > -#if QLA_64BIT_PTR
> > +#ifdef QLA_64BIT_PTR
>
> Thomas should test this, as it implies the previous patch was NEVER
> using the "true case" values, making it in effect a
> no-functional-change (NFC).
QLA_64BIT_PTR is defined to 1 when CONFIG_ARCH_DMA_ADDR_T_64BIT is set
so the true should have always worked, unless I am misunderstanding what
you are saying. The false case should have also worked because it is
still evaluated to 0 but it throws the warning to make sure that was
intended (again, as I understand it).
> > #define LOAD_CMD MBC_LOAD_RAM_A64_ROM
> > #define DUMP_CMD MBC_DUMP_RAM_A64_ROM
> > #define CMD_ARGS (BIT_7 | BIT_6 | BIT_4 | BIT_3 | BIT_2 | BIT_1 | BIT_0)
> > --
> --
> Thanks,
> ~Nick Desaulniers
Powered by blists - more mailing lists