[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <79f8e049-e5b3-5b42-a600-b3025ad51adc@solarflare.com>
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 2020 11:37:00 +0100
From: Edward Cree <ecree@...arflare.com>
To: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
CC: Michael Brown <mbrown@...systems.co.uk>,
Solarflare linux maintainers <linux-net-drivers@...arflare.com>,
Martin Habets <mhabets@...arflare.com>
Subject: Re: ethernet/sfc/ warnings with 32-bit dma_addr_t
On 19/08/2020 01:28, Randy Dunlap wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Does the drivers/net/ethernet/sfc/sfc driver require (expect)
> dma_addr_t to be 64 bits (as opposed to 32 bits)?
>
> I see that several #defines in ef100_regs.h are 64...
>
> When used with DMA_BIT_MASK(64), does the value just need to be
> truncated to 32 bits? Will that work?
As far as I can tell, truncation to 32 bits is harmless — the
called function (efx_init_io) already tries every mask from the
passed one down to 32 bits in case of PCIe hardware limitations.
The ef10 and siena versions also truncate like this (their
#defines are 48 and 46 respectively), but because they are
handled indirectly through efx_nic_type, the compiler isn't able
to determine this statically as it can with ef100.
> When I build this driver on i386 with 32-bit dma_addr_t, I see
> the following build warnings:
Could you test whether explicitly casting to dma_addr_t suppresses
the warnings? I.e.
efx_init_io(efx, bar,
(dma_addr_t)DMA_BIT_MASK(ESF_GZ_TX_SEND_ADDR_WIDTH),
pci_resource_len(efx->pci_dev, bar));
-ed
Powered by blists - more mailing lists