On Fri, Aug 28, 2026 at 08:58:46AM -0700, Tanmay Shah wrote:
> Fix following sparse warnings by using __force attribute:
>
> sparse warnings: (new ones prefixed by >>)
> drivers/remoteproc/xlnx_r5_remoteproc.c:571:20: sparse: sparse:
> cast removes address space '__iomem' of expression
> drivers/remoteproc/xlnx_r5_remoteproc.c:749:17: sparse: sparse:
> cast removes address space '__iomem' of expression
> drivers/remoteproc/xlnx_r5_remoteproc.c:773:24: sparse: sparse:
> cast removes address space '__iomem' of expression
> drivers/remoteproc/xlnx_r5_remoteproc.c:797:25: sparse: sparse:
> cast removes address space '__iomem' of expression
>
> >> drivers/remoteproc/xlnx_r5_remoteproc.c:837:49: sparse: sparse:
> incorrect type in initializer (different address spaces) @@ expected
> void *rsc_offset @@ got void [noderef] __iomem * @@
> drivers/remoteproc/xlnx_r5_remoteproc.c:837:49: sparse:
> expected void *rsc_offset
> drivers/remoteproc/xlnx_r5_remoteproc.c:837:49: sparse: got
> void [noderef] __iomem *
>
> Reported-by: kernel test robot <[email protected]>
> Closes:
> https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/[email protected]/
> Signed-off-by: Tanmay Shah <[email protected]>
I have applied this patch - apoligies for the delay, it got lost in the heap.
Mathieu
> ---
> drivers/remoteproc/xlnx_r5_remoteproc.c | 10 +++++-----
> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/xlnx_r5_remoteproc.c
> b/drivers/remoteproc/xlnx_r5_remoteproc.c
> index c685bb5fa62c..f9cdd3c024dc 100644
> --- a/drivers/remoteproc/xlnx_r5_remoteproc.c
> +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/xlnx_r5_remoteproc.c
> @@ -568,7 +568,7 @@ static int tcm_mem_map(struct rproc *rproc,
> return -ENOMEM;
>
> /* Update memory entry va */
> - mem->va = (void *)va;
> + mem->va = (__force void *)va;
>
> /* clear TCMs */
> memset_io(va, 0, mem->len);
> @@ -746,7 +746,7 @@ static struct resource_table
> *zynqmp_r5_get_loaded_rsc_table(struct rproc *rproc
>
> *size = r5_core->rsc_tbl_size;
>
> - return (struct resource_table *)r5_core->rsc_tbl_va;
> + return (__force struct resource_table *)r5_core->rsc_tbl_va;
> }
>
> static int zynqmp_r5_get_rsc_table_va(struct zynqmp_r5_core *r5_core)
> @@ -770,7 +770,7 @@ static int zynqmp_r5_get_rsc_table_va(struct
> zynqmp_r5_core *r5_core)
> return -EINVAL;
> }
>
> - rsc_data_va = (struct rsc_tbl_data *)ioremap_wc(res_mem.start,
> + rsc_data_va = (__force struct rsc_tbl_data *)ioremap_wc(res_mem.start,
> sizeof(struct
> rsc_tbl_data));
> if (!rsc_data_va) {
> dev_err(dev, "failed to map resource table data address\n");
> @@ -794,7 +794,7 @@ static int zynqmp_r5_get_rsc_table_va(struct
> zynqmp_r5_core *r5_core)
> return -EINVAL;
> }
>
> - rsc_tbl_addr = (struct resource_table *)r5_core->rsc_tbl_va;
> + rsc_tbl_addr = (__force struct resource_table *)r5_core->rsc_tbl_va;
>
> /*
> * As of now resource table version 1 is expected. Don't fail to attach
> @@ -834,7 +834,7 @@ static int zynqmp_r5_handle_rsc(struct rproc *rproc, u32
> rsc_type, void *rsc,
> int offset, int avail)
> {
> struct zynqmp_r5_core *r5_core = rproc->priv;
> - void *rsc_offset = (r5_core->rsc_tbl_va + offset);
> + void *rsc_offset = (__force void *)(r5_core->rsc_tbl_va + offset);
>
> if (rsc_type != XLNX_RPROC_FW_CRASH_REPORT)
> return RSC_IGNORED;
>
> base-commit: d4d61a4b0a52e8f3cdb3e1578602850a3452ec3e
> --
> 2.43.0
>
