From: "Jiang, Dave" <dave.jiang@intel.com>
To: "Allen.Hubbe@emc.com" <Allen.Hubbe@emc.com>,
"jdmason@kudzu.us" <jdmason@kudzu.us>,
"arnd@arndb.de" <arnd@arndb.de>
Cc: "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-ntb@googlegroups.com" <linux-ntb@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ntb: perf test: fix address space confusion
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2016 18:20:12 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1453832409.3824.59.camel@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1453800729-2501235-1-git-send-email-arnd@arndb.de>
On Tue, 2016-01-26 at 10:31 +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> The ntb driver assigns between pointers an __iomem tokens, and
> also casts them to 64-bit integers, which results in compiler
> warnings on 32-bit systems:
>
> drivers/ntb/test/ntb_perf.c: In function 'perf_copy':
> drivers/ntb/test/ntb_perf.c:213:10: error: cast from pointer to
> integer of different size [-Werror=pointer-to-int-cast]
> vbase = (u64)(u64 *)mw->vbase;
> ^
> drivers/ntb/test/ntb_perf.c:214:14: error: cast from pointer to
> integer of different size [-Werror=pointer-to-int-cast]
> dst_vaddr = (u64)(u64 *)dst;
> ^
>
> This adds __iomem annotations where needed and changes the temporary
> variables to iomem pointers to avoid casting them to u64. I did not
> see the problem in linux-next earlier, but it show showed up in
> 4.5-rc1.
>
> Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Dave Jiang <dave.jiang@intel.com>
> Fixes: 8a7b6a778a85 ("ntb: ntb perf tool")
> ---
> drivers/ntb/test/ntb_perf.c | 21 +++++++++++----------
> 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/ntb/test/ntb_perf.c
> b/drivers/ntb/test/ntb_perf.c
> index c8a37ba4b4f9..6bdc1e7b7503 100644
> --- a/drivers/ntb/test/ntb_perf.c
> +++ b/drivers/ntb/test/ntb_perf.c
> @@ -178,7 +178,7 @@ static void perf_copy_callback(void *data)
> atomic_dec(&pctx->dma_sync);
> }
>
> -static ssize_t perf_copy(struct pthr_ctx *pctx, char *dst,
> +static ssize_t perf_copy(struct pthr_ctx *pctx, char __iomem *dst,
> char *src, size_t size)
> {
> struct perf_ctx *perf = pctx->perf;
> @@ -189,7 +189,8 @@ static ssize_t perf_copy(struct pthr_ctx *pctx,
> char *dst,
> dma_cookie_t cookie;
> size_t src_off, dst_off;
> struct perf_mw *mw = &perf->mw;
> - u64 vbase, dst_vaddr;
> + void __iomem *vbase;
> + void __iomem *dst_vaddr;
> dma_addr_t dst_phys;
> int retries = 0;
>
> @@ -204,14 +205,14 @@ static ssize_t perf_copy(struct pthr_ctx *pctx,
> char *dst,
> }
>
> device = chan->device;
> - src_off = (size_t)src & ~PAGE_MASK;
> - dst_off = (size_t)dst & ~PAGE_MASK;
> + src_off = (uintptr_t)src & ~PAGE_MASK;
> + dst_off = (uintptr_t __force)dst & ~PAGE_MASK;
>
> if (!is_dma_copy_aligned(device, src_off, dst_off, size))
> return -ENODEV;
>
> - vbase = (u64)(u64 *)mw->vbase;
> - dst_vaddr = (u64)(u64 *)dst;
> + vbase = mw->vbase;
> + dst_vaddr = dst;
> dst_phys = mw->phys_addr + (dst_vaddr - vbase);
>
> unmap = dmaengine_get_unmap_data(device->dev, 1,
> GFP_NOWAIT);
> @@ -261,13 +262,13 @@ err_get_unmap:
> return 0;
> }
>
> -static int perf_move_data(struct pthr_ctx *pctx, char *dst, char
> *src,
> +static int perf_move_data(struct pthr_ctx *pctx, char __iomem *dst,
> char *src,
> u64 buf_size, u64 win_size, u64 total)
> {
> int chunks, total_chunks, i;
> int copied_chunks = 0;
> u64 copied = 0, result;
> - char *tmp = dst;
> + char __iomem *tmp = dst;
> u64 perf, diff_us;
> ktime_t kstart, kstop, kdiff;
>
> @@ -324,7 +325,7 @@ static int ntb_perf_thread(void *data)
> struct perf_ctx *perf = pctx->perf;
> struct pci_dev *pdev = perf->ntb->pdev;
> struct perf_mw *mw = &perf->mw;
> - char *dst;
> + char __iomem *dst;
> u64 win_size, buf_size, total;
> void *src;
> int rc, node, i;
> @@ -364,7 +365,7 @@ static int ntb_perf_thread(void *data)
> if (buf_size > MAX_TEST_SIZE)
> buf_size = MAX_TEST_SIZE;
>
> - dst = (char *)mw->vbase;
> + dst = (char __iomem *)mw->vbase;
>
> atomic_inc(&perf->tsync);
> while (atomic_read(&perf->tsync) != perf->perf_threads)
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: dave.jiang@intel.com (Jiang, Dave)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH] ntb: perf test: fix address space confusion
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2016 18:20:12 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1453832409.3824.59.camel@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1453800729-2501235-1-git-send-email-arnd@arndb.de>
On Tue, 2016-01-26 at 10:31 +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> The ntb driver assigns between pointers an __iomem tokens, and
> also casts them to 64-bit integers, which results in compiler
> warnings on 32-bit systems:
>
> drivers/ntb/test/ntb_perf.c: In function 'perf_copy':
> drivers/ntb/test/ntb_perf.c:213:10: error: cast from pointer to
> integer of different size [-Werror=pointer-to-int-cast]
> ? vbase = (u64)(u64 *)mw->vbase;
> ??????????^
> drivers/ntb/test/ntb_perf.c:214:14: error: cast from pointer to
> integer of different size [-Werror=pointer-to-int-cast]
> ? dst_vaddr = (u64)(u64 *)dst;
> ??????????????^
>
> This adds __iomem annotations where needed and changes the temporary
> variables to iomem pointers to avoid casting them to u64. I did not
> see the problem in linux-next earlier, but it show showed up in
> 4.5-rc1.
>
> Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Dave Jiang <dave.jiang@intel.com>
> Fixes: 8a7b6a778a85 ("ntb: ntb perf tool")
> ---
> ?drivers/ntb/test/ntb_perf.c | 21 +++++++++++----------
> ?1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/ntb/test/ntb_perf.c
> b/drivers/ntb/test/ntb_perf.c
> index c8a37ba4b4f9..6bdc1e7b7503 100644
> --- a/drivers/ntb/test/ntb_perf.c
> +++ b/drivers/ntb/test/ntb_perf.c
> @@ -178,7 +178,7 @@ static void perf_copy_callback(void *data)
> ? atomic_dec(&pctx->dma_sync);
> ?}
> ?
> -static ssize_t perf_copy(struct pthr_ctx *pctx, char *dst,
> +static ssize_t perf_copy(struct pthr_ctx *pctx, char __iomem *dst,
> ? ?char *src, size_t size)
> ?{
> ? struct perf_ctx *perf = pctx->perf;
> @@ -189,7 +189,8 @@ static ssize_t perf_copy(struct pthr_ctx *pctx,
> char *dst,
> ? dma_cookie_t cookie;
> ? size_t src_off, dst_off;
> ? struct perf_mw *mw = &perf->mw;
> - u64 vbase, dst_vaddr;
> + void __iomem *vbase;
> + void __iomem *dst_vaddr;
> ? dma_addr_t dst_phys;
> ? int retries = 0;
> ?
> @@ -204,14 +205,14 @@ static ssize_t perf_copy(struct pthr_ctx *pctx,
> char *dst,
> ? }
> ?
> ? device = chan->device;
> - src_off = (size_t)src & ~PAGE_MASK;
> - dst_off = (size_t)dst & ~PAGE_MASK;
> + src_off = (uintptr_t)src & ~PAGE_MASK;
> + dst_off = (uintptr_t __force)dst & ~PAGE_MASK;
> ?
> ? if (!is_dma_copy_aligned(device, src_off, dst_off, size))
> ? return -ENODEV;
> ?
> - vbase = (u64)(u64 *)mw->vbase;
> - dst_vaddr = (u64)(u64 *)dst;
> + vbase = mw->vbase;
> + dst_vaddr = dst;
> ? dst_phys = mw->phys_addr + (dst_vaddr - vbase);
> ?
> ? unmap = dmaengine_get_unmap_data(device->dev, 1,
> GFP_NOWAIT);
> @@ -261,13 +262,13 @@ err_get_unmap:
> ? return 0;
> ?}
> ?
> -static int perf_move_data(struct pthr_ctx *pctx, char *dst, char
> *src,
> +static int perf_move_data(struct pthr_ctx *pctx, char __iomem *dst,
> char *src,
> ? ??u64 buf_size, u64 win_size, u64 total)
> ?{
> ? int chunks, total_chunks, i;
> ? int copied_chunks = 0;
> ? u64 copied = 0, result;
> - char *tmp = dst;
> + char __iomem *tmp = dst;
> ? u64 perf, diff_us;
> ? ktime_t kstart, kstop, kdiff;
> ?
> @@ -324,7 +325,7 @@ static int ntb_perf_thread(void *data)
> ? struct perf_ctx *perf = pctx->perf;
> ? struct pci_dev *pdev = perf->ntb->pdev;
> ? struct perf_mw *mw = &perf->mw;
> - char *dst;
> + char __iomem *dst;
> ? u64 win_size, buf_size, total;
> ? void *src;
> ? int rc, node, i;
> @@ -364,7 +365,7 @@ static int ntb_perf_thread(void *data)
> ? if (buf_size > MAX_TEST_SIZE)
> ? buf_size = MAX_TEST_SIZE;
> ?
> - dst = (char *)mw->vbase;
> + dst = (char __iomem *)mw->vbase;
> ?
> ? atomic_inc(&perf->tsync);
> ? while (atomic_read(&perf->tsync) != perf->perf_threads)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-01-26 18:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-01-26 9:31 [PATCH] ntb: perf test: fix address space confusion Arnd Bergmann
2016-01-26 9:31 ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-01-26 18:20 ` Jiang, Dave [this message]
2016-01-26 18:20 ` Jiang, Dave
2016-03-07 21:36 ` Jon Mason
2016-03-07 21:36 ` Jon Mason
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1453832409.3824.59.camel@intel.com \
--to=dave.jiang@intel.com \
--cc=Allen.Hubbe@emc.com \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=jdmason@kudzu.us \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-ntb@googlegroups.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.