Messages in this thread | | | From | Neal Liu <> | Subject | RE: [PATCH-next] crypto: aspeed: fix type warnings | Date | Thu, 2 Feb 2023 03:23:29 +0000 |
| |
> -----Original Message----- > From: Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au> > Sent: Thursday, February 2, 2023 11:10 AM > To: Neal Liu <neal_liu@aspeedtech.com> > Cc: Joel Stanley <joel@jms.id.au>; Andrew Jeffery <andrew@aj.id.au>; David > S . Miller <davem@davemloft.net>; linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; > linux-aspeed@lists.ozlabs.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; > linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org > Subject: Re: [PATCH-next] crypto: aspeed: fix type warnings > > On Thu, Feb 02, 2023 at 10:56:00AM +0800, Neal Liu wrote: > > > > @@ -302,7 +302,7 @@ static int aspeed_acry_rsa_ctx_copy(struct > > aspeed_acry_dev *acry_dev, void *buf, static int > > aspeed_acry_rsa_transfer(struct aspeed_acry_dev *acry_dev) { > > struct akcipher_request *req = acry_dev->req; > > - u8 *sram_buffer = (u8 *)acry_dev->acry_sram; > > + u8 *sram_buffer = (u8 __force *)acry_dev->acry_sram; > > Wouldn't it be better to keep the iomem marker and then use readb on > sram_buffer? > This way works too. I cannot tell which way is better. Do you prefer to keep the iomem marker? Thanks
-Neal
| |