Re: [PATCH v1 1/2] ACPI / boot: Correct address space of __acpi_map_table()

[Andy Shevchenko]

On Mon, 2017-07-17 at 12:57 +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 17, 2017 at 12:49 PM, Hanjun Guo 
> wrote:
> > On 2017/7/8 23:50, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > > Sparse complains about wrong address space used in
> > > __acpi_map_table()
> > > and in __acpi_unmap_table().
> > > 
> > > arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c:127:29: warning: incorrect type in
> > > return expression (different address spaces)
> > > arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c:127:29:expected char *
> > > arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c:127:29:got void [noderef] *
> > > arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c:135:23: warning: incorrect type in
> > > argument 1 (different address spaces)
> > > arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c:135:23:expected void [noderef]
> > > *addr
> > > arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c:135:23:got char *map
> > > 
> > > Correct address space to be in align of type of returned and
> > > passed
> > > parameter.
> > > -char * __acpi_map_table (unsigned long phys_addr, unsigned long
> > > size);
> > > -void __acpi_unmap_table(char *map, unsigned long size);
> > > +void __iomem *__acpi_map_table(unsigned long phys_addr, unsigned
> > > long size);
> > > +void __acpi_unmap_table(void __iomem *map, unsigned long size);
> > 
> > This breaks ACPI compile on ARM64 as ARM64 has its definition for
> > those
> > two functions,
> 
> Oops, missed that, sorry.
> 
> > I see patches in linux-next already, should I add a patch on top
> > to fix it, or this patch should be respined?
> 
> Whatever Rafael prefers. I'm fine with either.
> I have more patches against that c-file, perhaps better to respin.

I missed ia64 too :-(

-- 
Andy Shevchenko 
Intel Finland Oy

Re: [PATCH v1 1/2] ACPI / boot: Correct address space of __acpi_map_table()

[Andy Shevchenko]

On Mon, 2017-07-17 at 12:57 +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 17, 2017 at 12:49 PM, Hanjun Guo 
> wrote:
> > On 2017/7/8 23:50, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > > Sparse complains about wrong address space used in
> > > __acpi_map_table()
> > > and in __acpi_unmap_table().
> > > 
> > > arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c:127:29: warning: incorrect type in
> > > return expression (different address spaces)
> > > arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c:127:29:expected char *
> > > arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c:127:29:got void [noderef] *
> > > arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c:135:23: warning: incorrect type in
> > > argument 1 (different address spaces)
> > > arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c:135:23:expected void [noderef]
> > > *addr
> > > arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c:135:23:got char *map
> > > 
> > > Correct address space to be in align of type of returned and
> > > passed
> > > parameter.
> > > -char * __acpi_map_table (unsigned long phys_addr, unsigned long
> > > size);
> > > -void __acpi_unmap_table(char *map, unsigned long size);
> > > +void __iomem *__acpi_map_table(unsigned long phys_addr, unsigned
> > > long size);
> > > +void __acpi_unmap_table(void __iomem *map, unsigned long size);
> > 
> > This breaks ACPI compile on ARM64 as ARM64 has its definition for
> > those
> > two functions,
> 
> Oops, missed that, sorry.
> 
> > I see patches in linux-next already, should I add a patch on top
> > to fix it, or this patch should be respined?
> 
> Whatever Rafael prefers. I'm fine with either.
> I have more patches against that c-file, perhaps better to respin.

I missed ia64 too :-(

-- 
Andy Shevchenko 
Intel Finland Oy

Re: [PATCH v1 1/2] ACPI / boot: Correct address space of __acpi_map_table()

[Andy Shevchenko]

On Mon, Jul 17, 2017 at 12:49 PM, Hanjun Guo  wrote:
> On 2017/7/8 23:50, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>> Sparse complains about wrong address space used in __acpi_map_table()
>> and in __acpi_unmap_table().
>>
>> arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c:127:29: warning: incorrect type in return 
>> expression (different address spaces)
>> arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c:127:29:expected char *
>> arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c:127:29:got void [noderef] *
>> arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c:135:23: warning: incorrect type in argument 1 
>> (different address spaces)
>> arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c:135:23:expected void [noderef] *addr
>> arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c:135:23:got char *map
>>
>> Correct address space to be in align of type of returned and passed
>> parameter.

>> -char * __acpi_map_table (unsigned long phys_addr, unsigned long size);
>> -void __acpi_unmap_table(char *map, unsigned long size);
>> +void __iomem *__acpi_map_table(unsigned long phys_addr, unsigned long size);
>> +void __acpi_unmap_table(void __iomem *map, unsigned long size);
>
> This breaks ACPI compile on ARM64 as ARM64 has its definition for those
> two functions,

Oops, missed that, sorry.

> I see patches in linux-next already, should I add a patch on top
> to fix it, or this patch should be respined?

Whatever Rafael prefers. I'm fine with either.
I have more patches against that c-file, perhaps better to respin.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko

Re: [PATCH v1 1/2] ACPI / boot: Correct address space of __acpi_map_table()

[Andy Shevchenko]

On Mon, Jul 17, 2017 at 12:49 PM, Hanjun Guo  wrote:
> On 2017/7/8 23:50, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>> Sparse complains about wrong address space used in __acpi_map_table()
>> and in __acpi_unmap_table().
>>
>> arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c:127:29: warning: incorrect type in return 
>> expression (different address spaces)
>> arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c:127:29:expected char *
>> arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c:127:29:got void [noderef] *
>> arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c:135:23: warning: incorrect type in argument 1 
>> (different address spaces)
>> arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c:135:23:expected void [noderef] *addr
>> arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c:135:23:got char *map
>>
>> Correct address space to be in align of type of returned and passed
>> parameter.

>> -char * __acpi_map_table (unsigned long phys_addr, unsigned long size);
>> -void __acpi_unmap_table(char *map, unsigned long size);
>> +void __iomem *__acpi_map_table(unsigned long phys_addr, unsigned long size);
>> +void __acpi_unmap_table(void __iomem *map, unsigned long size);
>
> This breaks ACPI compile on ARM64 as ARM64 has its definition for those
> two functions,

Oops, missed that, sorry.

> I see patches in linux-next already, should I add a patch on top
> to fix it, or this patch should be respined?

Whatever Rafael prefers. I'm fine with either.
I have more patches against that c-file, perhaps better to respin.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko

Re: [PATCH v1 1/2] ACPI / boot: Correct address space of __acpi_map_table()

[Hanjun Guo]

On 2017/7/8 23:50, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> Sparse complains about wrong address space used in __acpi_map_table()
> and in __acpi_unmap_table().
>
> arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c:127:29: warning: incorrect type in return 
> expression (different address spaces)
> arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c:127:29:expected char *
> arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c:127:29:got void [noderef] *
> arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c:135:23: warning: incorrect type in argument 1 
> (different address spaces)
> arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c:135:23:expected void [noderef] *addr
> arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c:135:23:got char *map
>
> Correct address space to be in align of type of returned and passed
> parameter.
>
> Signed-off-by: Andy Shevchenko 
> ---
>  arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c | 4 ++--
>  include/linux/acpi.h| 4 ++--
>  2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c b/arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c
> index 6d534af94761..ac9bb564f004 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c
> @@ -118,7 +118,7 @@ static u32 isa_irq_to_gsi[NR_IRQS_LEGACY] __read_mostly = 
> {
>   * This is just a simple wrapper around early_ioremap(),
>   * with sanity checks for phys == 0 and size == 0.
>   */
> -char *__init __acpi_map_table(unsigned long phys, unsigned long size)
> +void __init __iomem *__acpi_map_table(unsigned long phys, unsigned long size)
>  {
>  
>   if (!phys || !size)
> @@ -127,7 +127,7 @@ char *__init __acpi_map_table(unsigned long phys, 
> unsigned long size)
>   return early_ioremap(phys, size);
>  }
>  
> -void __init __acpi_unmap_table(char *map, unsigned long size)
> +void __init __acpi_unmap_table(void __iomem *map, unsigned long size)
>  {
>   if (!map || !size)
>   return;
> diff --git a/include/linux/acpi.h b/include/linux/acpi.h
> index 99f96df83dd8..17cb57a533bb 100644
> --- a/include/linux/acpi.h
> +++ b/include/linux/acpi.h
> @@ -224,8 +224,8 @@ struct acpi_subtable_proc {
>   int count;
>  };
>  
> -char * __acpi_map_table (unsigned long phys_addr, unsigned long size);
> -void __acpi_unmap_table(char *map, unsigned long size);
> +void __iomem *__acpi_map_table(unsigned long phys_addr, unsigned long size);
> +void __acpi_unmap_table(void __iomem *map, unsigned long size);

This breaks ACPI compile on ARM64 as ARM64 has its definition for those
two functions, I see patches in linux-next already, should I add a patch on top
to fix it, or this patch should be respined?

Thanks
Hanjun

Re: [PATCH v1 1/2] ACPI / boot: Correct address space of __acpi_map_table()

[Hanjun Guo]

On 2017/7/8 23:50, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> Sparse complains about wrong address space used in __acpi_map_table()
> and in __acpi_unmap_table().
>
> arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c:127:29: warning: incorrect type in return 
> expression (different address spaces)
> arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c:127:29:expected char *
> arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c:127:29:got void [noderef] *
> arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c:135:23: warning: incorrect type in argument 1 
> (different address spaces)
> arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c:135:23:expected void [noderef] *addr
> arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c:135:23:got char *map
>
> Correct address space to be in align of type of returned and passed
> parameter.
>
> Signed-off-by: Andy Shevchenko 
> ---
>  arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c | 4 ++--
>  include/linux/acpi.h| 4 ++--
>  2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c b/arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c
> index 6d534af94761..ac9bb564f004 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c
> @@ -118,7 +118,7 @@ static u32 isa_irq_to_gsi[NR_IRQS_LEGACY] __read_mostly = 
> {
>   * This is just a simple wrapper around early_ioremap(),
>   * with sanity checks for phys == 0 and size == 0.
>   */
> -char *__init __acpi_map_table(unsigned long phys, unsigned long size)
> +void __init __iomem *__acpi_map_table(unsigned long phys, unsigned long size)
>  {
>  
>   if (!phys || !size)
> @@ -127,7 +127,7 @@ char *__init __acpi_map_table(unsigned long phys, 
> unsigned long size)
>   return early_ioremap(phys, size);
>  }
>  
> -void __init __acpi_unmap_table(char *map, unsigned long size)
> +void __init __acpi_unmap_table(void __iomem *map, unsigned long size)
>  {
>   if (!map || !size)
>   return;
> diff --git a/include/linux/acpi.h b/include/linux/acpi.h
> index 99f96df83dd8..17cb57a533bb 100644
> --- a/include/linux/acpi.h
> +++ b/include/linux/acpi.h
> @@ -224,8 +224,8 @@ struct acpi_subtable_proc {
>   int count;
>  };
>  
> -char * __acpi_map_table (unsigned long phys_addr, unsigned long size);
> -void __acpi_unmap_table(char *map, unsigned long size);
> +void __iomem *__acpi_map_table(unsigned long phys_addr, unsigned long size);
> +void __acpi_unmap_table(void __iomem *map, unsigned long size);

This breaks ACPI compile on ARM64 as ARM64 has its definition for those
two functions, I see patches in linux-next already, should I add a patch on top
to fix it, or this patch should be respined?

Thanks
Hanjun