On Wed, 2015-04-08 at 09:40 +0000, David Laight wrote: > From: yanjiang....@windriver.com > > Sent: 03 April 2015 10:18 > > From: Yanjiang Jin <yanjiang....@windriver.com> > > > > do_div() expects the type of "n" to be uint64_t, define "lat_ns" as u64 to > > avoid the below warning, also update its correlative operations and data. > > > > In file included from ./arch/powerpc/include/asm/div64.h:1:0, > > from include/linux/kernel.h:124, > > from include/linux/list.h:8, > > from include/linux/timer.h:4, > > from drivers/net/ethernet/intel/e1000e/e1000.h:29, > > from drivers/net/ethernet/intel/e1000e/ich8lan.c:59: > > drivers/net/ethernet/intel/e1000e/ich8lan.c: In function > > 'e1000_platform_pm_pch_lpt': > > include/asm-generic/div64.h:43:28: warning: comparison of distinct pointer > > types lacks a cast [enabled > > by default] > > (void)(((typeof((n)) *)0) == ((uint64_t *)0)); \ > > ^ > > drivers/net/ethernet/intel/e1000e/ich8lan.c:1016:4: note: in expansion of > > macro 'do_div' > > do_div(lat_ns, speed); > > > > Signed-off-by: Yanjiang Jin <yanjiang....@windriver.com> > > --- > > drivers/net/ethernet/intel/e1000e/ich8lan.c | 8 ++++---- > > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/e1000e/ich8lan.c > > b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/e1000e/ich8lan.c > > index 48b74a5..baab58b 100644 > > --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/e1000e/ich8lan.c > > +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/e1000e/ich8lan.c > > @@ -982,8 +982,8 @@ static s32 e1000_platform_pm_pch_lpt(struct e1000_hw > > *hw, bool link) > > u16 speed, duplex, scale = 0; > > u16 max_snoop, max_nosnoop; > > u16 max_ltr_enc; /* max LTR latency encoded */ > > - s64 lat_ns; /* latency (ns) */ > > - s64 value; > > + u64 lat_ns; /* latency (ns) */ > > + u64 value; > > u32 rxa; > > > > if (!hw->adapter->max_frame_size) { > > @@ -1008,8 +1008,8 @@ static s32 e1000_platform_pm_pch_lpt(struct e1000_hw > > *hw, bool link) > > * 2^25*(2^10-1) ns. The scale is encoded as 0=2^0ns, > > * 1=2^5ns, 2=2^10ns,...5=2^25ns. > > */ > > - lat_ns = ((s64)rxa * 1024 - > > - (2 * (s64)hw->adapter->max_frame_size)) * 8 * 1000; > > + lat_ns = ((u64)rxa * 1024 - > > + (2 * (u64)hw->adapter->max_frame_size)) * 8 * 1000; > > if (lat_ns < 0) > > lat_ns = 0; > > The above change cannot be correct. > You should be getting another error for testing an unsigned value be less > than 0. > > So I presume this wasn't even tested. >
I found the same issue and I am putting together another patch to resolve the issue that Yanjiang saw.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part