Hi Serge, Serge Semin <sergey.se...@baikalelectronics.ru> wrote on Thu, 12 Nov 2020 18:27:39 +0300:
> Hello Vignesh > > On Thu, Nov 12, 2020 at 08:30:42PM +0530, Vignesh Raghavendra wrote: > > > > > > On 11/12/20 1:57 PM, Miquel Raynal wrote: > > > Hi Sergey, > > > > > > Serge Semin <sergey.se...@baikalelectronics.ru> wrote on Wed, 11 Nov > > > 2020 22:22:59 +0300: > > > > > >> On Tue, Nov 10, 2020 at 04:35:56PM +0100, Miquel Raynal wrote: > > >>> Hi Serge, > > >>> > > >>> Serge Semin <sergey.se...@baikalelectronics.ru> wrote on Tue, 10 Nov > > >>> 2020 14:38:27 +0300: > > >>> > > >>>> Hello Miquel, > > >>>> > > >>>> A situation noted by the warning below won't cause any problem because > > >>>> the casting is done to a non-dereferenced variable. It is utilized > > >>>> as a pointer bias later in that function. Shall we just ignore the > > >>>> warning or still fix it somehow? > > >>> > > >> > > >>> Do you think the cast to a !__iomem value is mandatory here? > > >> > > >> It's not mandatory to have the casting with no __iomem, but wouldn't > > >> doing like this: > > >> + shift = (ssize_t __iomem)src & 0x3; > > >> be looking weird? Really, is there a good way to somehow extract the > > >> first > > >> two bits of a __iomem pointer without getting the sparse warning? > > > > > > I asked around me, what about trying uintptr_t? > > > > > > > > One more way is to use __force to tell sparse that this casting is > > intentional: > > > > shift = (__force ssize_t)src & 0x3; > > Oh, great! That solution is actually much better than using some > currently unexplained sparse peculiarity! I was thinking about applying > some other attribute, but __force just didn't come to my mind. Thank > you very much for the suggestion. I'll post the fix with the solution > suggested by you. Is the ssize_t cast the right one btw? I would definitely prefer an unsigned type here. Thanks, Miquèl