linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] clocksource: clint: Avoid remove __iomem in get_cycles

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20201223082330.GA24581@infradead.org>
Date:   Wed, 23 Dec 2020 08:23:30 +0000
From:   Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To:     Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>
Cc:     linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org, daniel.lezcano@...aro.org,
        kernel test robot <lkp@...el.com>,
        Palmer Dabbelt <palmerdabbelt@...gle.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, tglx@...utronix.de,
        kernel-team@...roid.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] clocksource: clint: Avoid remove __iomem in
 get_cycles_hi()

On Mon, Dec 21, 2020 at 09:32:30PM -0800, Palmer Dabbelt wrote:
> From: Palmer Dabbelt <palmerdabbelt@...gle.com>
> 
> This cast loses the __iomem qualifier from clint_timer_val, which
> triggers an sparse warning.

I'm not a native speaker, but the subject line sounds strange to me.
Shouldn't this be:

	"don't cast away the __iommu annotation"

or something similar?

Also this adds an overly long line.  Otherwise it looks fine.