Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 19 Jul 2023 13:39:41 +0200 | Subject | Re: [PATCH] MIPS: Loongson64: Fix more __iomem attributes | From | Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <> |
| |
On 18/7/23 15:44, Jiaxun Yang wrote: > There are some __iomem type casting being missed in previous patch. > Fix them here. > > Fixes: 5bd3990723bd ("MIPS: Loongson64: Prefix ipi register address pointers with __iomem") > Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com> > Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202307020639.QCZOKp8B-lkp@intel.com/ > Signed-off-by: Jiaxun Yang <jiaxun.yang@flygoat.com> > --- > arch/mips/loongson64/smp.c | 168 ++++++++++++++++++------------------- > 1 file changed, 84 insertions(+), 84 deletions(-)
> static void ipi_mailbox_buf_init(void) > { > - ipi_mailbox_buf[0] = (void *) > + ipi_mailbox_buf[0] = (void __iomem *) > (SMP_CORE_GROUP0_BASE + SMP_CORE0_OFFSET + BUF); > - ipi_mailbox_buf[1] = (void *) > + ipi_mailbox_buf[1] = (void __iomem *) > (SMP_CORE_GROUP0_BASE + SMP_CORE1_OFFSET + BUF); > - ipi_mailbox_buf[2] = (void *) > + ipi_mailbox_buf[2] = (void __iomem *) > (SMP_CORE_GROUP0_BASE + SMP_CORE2_OFFSET + BUF); > - ipi_mailbox_buf[3] = (void *) > + ipi_mailbox_buf[3] = (void __iomem *) > (SMP_CORE_GROUP0_BASE + SMP_CORE3_OFFSET + BUF); > - ipi_mailbox_buf[4] = (void *) > + ipi_mailbox_buf[4] = (void __iomem *) > (SMP_CORE_GROUP1_BASE + SMP_CORE0_OFFSET + BUF); > - ipi_mailbox_buf[5] = (void *) > + ipi_mailbox_buf[5] = (void __iomem *) > (SMP_CORE_GROUP1_BASE + SMP_CORE1_OFFSET + BUF); > - ipi_mailbox_buf[6] = (void *) > + ipi_mailbox_buf[6] = (void __iomem *) > (SMP_CORE_GROUP1_BASE + SMP_CORE2_OFFSET + BUF); > - ipi_mailbox_buf[7] = (void *) > + ipi_mailbox_buf[7] = (void __iomem *) > (SMP_CORE_GROUP1_BASE + SMP_CORE3_OFFSET + BUF); > - ipi_mailbox_buf[8] = (void *) > + ipi_mailbox_buf[8] = (void __iomem *) > (SMP_CORE_GROUP2_BASE + SMP_CORE0_OFFSET + BUF); > - ipi_mailbox_buf[9] = (void *) > + ipi_mailbox_buf[9] = (void __iomem *) > (SMP_CORE_GROUP2_BASE + SMP_CORE1_OFFSET + BUF); > - ipi_mailbox_buf[10] = (void *) > + ipi_mailbox_buf[10] = (void __iomem *) > (SMP_CORE_GROUP2_BASE + SMP_CORE2_OFFSET + BUF); > - ipi_mailbox_buf[11] = (void *) > + ipi_mailbox_buf[11] = (void __iomem *) > (SMP_CORE_GROUP2_BASE + SMP_CORE3_OFFSET + BUF); > - ipi_mailbox_buf[12] = (void *) > + ipi_mailbox_buf[12] = (void __iomem *) > (SMP_CORE_GROUP3_BASE + SMP_CORE0_OFFSET + BUF); > - ipi_mailbox_buf[13] = (void *) > + ipi_mailbox_buf[13] = (void __iomem *) > (SMP_CORE_GROUP3_BASE + SMP_CORE1_OFFSET + BUF); > - ipi_mailbox_buf[14] = (void *) > + ipi_mailbox_buf[14] = (void __iomem *) > (SMP_CORE_GROUP3_BASE + SMP_CORE2_OFFSET + BUF); > - ipi_mailbox_buf[15] = (void *) > + ipi_mailbox_buf[15] = (void __iomem *) > (SMP_CORE_GROUP3_BASE + SMP_CORE3_OFFSET + BUF); > }
OK up to here,
> @@ -782,7 +782,7 @@ void play_dead(void) > > if (prid_imp == PRID_IMP_LOONGSON_64G) { > play_dead_at_ckseg1 = > - (void *)CKSEG1ADDR((unsigned long)loongson3_type3_play_dead); > + (void __iomem *)CKSEG1ADDR((unsigned long)loongson3_type3_play_dead);
but these changes look dubious.
> goto out; > } > > @@ -790,19 +790,19 @@ void play_dead(void) > case PRID_REV_LOONGSON3A_R1: > default: > play_dead_at_ckseg1 = > - (void *)CKSEG1ADDR((unsigned long)loongson3_type1_play_dead); > + (void __iomem *)CKSEG1ADDR((unsigned long)loongson3_type1_play_dead); > break; > case PRID_REV_LOONGSON3B_R1: > case PRID_REV_LOONGSON3B_R2: > play_dead_at_ckseg1 = > - (void *)CKSEG1ADDR((unsigned long)loongson3_type2_play_dead); > + (void __iomem *)CKSEG1ADDR((unsigned long)loongson3_type2_play_dead); > break; > case PRID_REV_LOONGSON3A_R2_0: > case PRID_REV_LOONGSON3A_R2_1: > case PRID_REV_LOONGSON3A_R3_0: > case PRID_REV_LOONGSON3A_R3_1: > play_dead_at_ckseg1 = > - (void *)CKSEG1ADDR((unsigned long)loongson3_type3_play_dead); > + (void __iomem *)CKSEG1ADDR((unsigned long)loongson3_type3_play_dead); > break; > } >
| |