linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH v2 2/2] soc: renesas: Add L2 cache management for RZ/Five SoC

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]

Date:   Wed, 5 Oct 2022 11:29:20 +0100
From:   Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@...rochip.com>
To:     "Lad, Prabhakar" <prabhakar.csengg@...il.com>
CC:     <conor@...nel.org>, <geert+renesas@...der.be>,
        <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>, <palmer@...belt.com>,
        <aou@...s.berkeley.edu>, <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>, <magnus.damm@...il.com>,
        <heiko@...ech.de>, <guoren@...nel.org>, <philipp.tomsich@...ll.eu>,
        <nathan@...nel.org>, <atishp@...osinc.com>,
        <apatel@...tanamicro.com>, <linux-renesas-soc@...r.kernel.org>,
        <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org>, <biju.das.jz@...renesas.com>,
        <prabhakar.mahadev-lad.rj@...renesas.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 2/2] soc: renesas: Add L2 cache management for
 RZ/Five SoC

On Wed, Oct 05, 2022 at 11:20:40AM +0100, Lad, Prabhakar wrote:
> Hi Conor,
> 
> On Wed, Oct 5, 2022 at 10:17 AM <Conor.Dooley@...rochip.com> wrote:
> >
> > On 05/10/2022 09:58, Conor Dooley wrote:
> > > EXTERNAL EMAIL: Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe
> > >
> > > On 5 October 2022 09:44:56 IST, "Lad, Prabhakar" <prabhakar.csengg@...il.com> wrote:
> > >> Hi Conor,
> > >>
> > >> Thank you for the review.
> > >>
> > >> On Tue, Oct 4, 2022 at 6:43 PM Conor Dooley <conor@...nel.org> wrote:
> > >
> > >>>> +static void cpu_dcache_wb_range(unsigned long start,
> > >>>> +                             unsigned long end,
> > >>>> +                             int line_size)
> > >>>> +{
> > >>>> +     bool ucctl_ok = false;
> > >>>> +     unsigned long pa;
> > >>>> +     int mhartid = 0;
> > >>>> +#ifdef CONFIG_SMP
> > >>>> +     mhartid = smp_processor_id();
> > >>>> +#endif
> > >>>
> > >>> Won't this produce complaints from your if you compile with CONFIG_SMP
> > >>> set?
> > >>>
> > >> No I dont see a build issue with SMP enabled, do you see any reason
> > >> why it should fail?
> > >
> > > Not fail but complain about the unused variable.
> > >
> >
> > Not unused variable, sorry but the unused 0 that it was initialised with*
> 
> No, it doesn't complain (I dont think compilers complain of such
> unused assignments, maybe I'm wrong). BTW I am using GCC 9.4.0. Do you
> think I need to update it?

Maybe it's sparse that generates those warnings, I never know which it
is...