On Tue, 2015-01-20 at 14:03 -0600, Kim Phillips wrote:
> Fix this:
>
> CC arch/powerpc/sysdev/fsl_pci.o
> arch/powerpc/sysdev/fsl_pci.c: In function 'fsl_pcie_check_link':
> arch/powerpc/sysdev/fsl_pci.c:91:1: error: the frame size of 1360 bytes is
> larger than 1024 bytes [-Werror=frame-larger-than=]
>
> when configuring FRAME_WARN, by converting the allocation from the
> stack to the heap. We use GFP_ATOMIC since this function can be
> called with interrupts disabled.
>
> Signed-off-by: Kim Phillips <kim.phill...@freescale.com>
> ---
> arch/powerpc/sysdev/fsl_pci.c | 12 +++++++-----
> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/sysdev/fsl_pci.c b/arch/powerpc/sysdev/fsl_pci.c
> index 6455c1e..635d743 100644
> --- a/arch/powerpc/sysdev/fsl_pci.c
> +++ b/arch/powerpc/sysdev/fsl_pci.c
> @@ -69,11 +69,13 @@ static int fsl_pcie_check_link(struct pci_controller
> *hose)
>
> if (hose->indirect_type & PPC_INDIRECT_TYPE_FSL_CFG_REG_LINK) {
> if (hose->ops->read == fsl_indirect_read_config) {
> - struct pci_bus bus;
> - bus.number = hose->first_busno;
> - bus.sysdata = hose;
> - bus.ops = hose->ops;
> - indirect_read_config(&bus, 0, PCIE_LTSSM, 4, &val);
> + struct pci_bus *bus;
> + bus = kmalloc(sizeof(*bus), GFP_ATOMIC);
> + bus->number = hose->first_busno;
Missing check for allocation failure.
Do we not have a real struct pci_bus we can use here? Or refactor
indirect_read_config() to take hose and bus number instead?
If putting a pci_bus struct on the stack is no longer OK, then
fake_pci_bus() should be fixed as well. I wonder if GCC is allocating
separate pci_bus structs on the stack for this one and the one that
early_read_config_dword() uses...
-Scott
_______________________________________________
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
