[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAK8P3a3btGD5oqmPXJk=UOmA=wuUxn-vOOO982uAjuRcE3crVg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2020 10:48:19 +0200
From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
Cc: Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>, arm-soc <arm@...nel.org>,
SoC Team <soc@...nel.org>, Markus Mayer <mmayer@...adcom.com>,
bcm-kernel-feedback-list <bcm-kernel-feedback-list@...adcom.com>,
Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
Santosh Shilimkar <ssantosh@...nel.org>,
Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@...il.com>,
Roger Quadros <rogerq@...com>,
Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>,
Vladimir Zapolskiy <vz@...ia.com>,
Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>,
Jonathan Hunter <jonathanh@...dia.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
"moderated list:ARM/Mediatek SoC..."
<linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org>,
linux-omap <linux-omap@...r.kernel.org>,
"open list:TEGRA ARCHITECTURE SUPPORT" <linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 14/23] memory: ti-emif-pm: Fix cast to iomem pointer
On Thu, Jul 23, 2020 at 9:39 AM Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> Cast pointer to iomem memory properly to fix sparse warning:
>
> drivers/memory/ti-emif-pm.c:251:38: warning: incorrect type in argument 1 (different address spaces)
> drivers/memory/ti-emif-pm.c:251:38: expected void const volatile [noderef] __iomem *addr
> drivers/memory/ti-emif-pm.c:251:38: got void *
>
> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
> ---
> drivers/memory/ti-emif-pm.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/memory/ti-emif-pm.c b/drivers/memory/ti-emif-pm.c
> index 9c90f815ad3a..6c747c1e98cb 100644
> --- a/drivers/memory/ti-emif-pm.c
> +++ b/drivers/memory/ti-emif-pm.c
> @@ -248,7 +248,7 @@ MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, ti_emif_of_match);
> static int ti_emif_resume(struct device *dev)
> {
> unsigned long tmp =
> - __raw_readl((void *)emif_instance->ti_emif_sram_virt);
> + __raw_readl((void __iomem *)emif_instance->ti_emif_sram_virt);
>
Maybe this shouldn't even be __raw_readl(), but instead READ_ONCE()?
The other accesses in this file don't use MMIO wrappers either but just treat
it as a pointer. The effect would be the same though.
Arnd
Powered by blists - more mailing lists