From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: tony@atomide.com (Tony Lindgren) Date: Wed, 13 Nov 2013 13:56:31 -0800 Subject: [PATCH] ARM: omap: fix warning with LPAE build In-Reply-To: References: <1384325630-26998-1-git-send-email-olof@lixom.net> <20131113200527.GA10317@atomide.com> Message-ID: <20131113215630.GB10317@atomide.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org * Olof Johansson [131113 13:23]: > On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 12:31 PM, Olof Johansson wrote: > > On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 12:05 PM, Tony Lindgren wrote: > >> * Olof Johansson [131112 22:53]: > >>> Some omap3 code is throwing a warning: > >>> arch/arm/mach-omap2/pm34xx.c: In function 'omap3_save_secure_ram_context': > >>> arch/arm/mach-omap2/pm34xx.c:123:32: warning: cast to pointer from > >>> integer of different size [-Wint-to-pointer-cast] > >>> > >>> In reality this code will never actually execute with LPAE=y, since > >>> Cortex-A8 doesn't support it. So downcasting the __pa() is safe in > >>> this case. > >>> > >>> Signed-off-by: Olof Johansson > >>> --- > >>> > >>> Tony, queue up if you have a fixes branch please, otherwise I can apply > >>> directly. > >>> > >>> arch/arm/mach-omap2/pm34xx.c | 2 +- > >>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > >>> > >>> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/pm34xx.c b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/pm34xx.c > >>> index 93b80e5..1f3770a 100644 > >>> --- a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/pm34xx.c > >>> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/pm34xx.c > >>> @@ -120,7 +120,7 @@ static void omap3_save_secure_ram_context(void) > >>> * will hang the system. > >>> */ > >>> pwrdm_set_next_pwrst(mpu_pwrdm, PWRDM_POWER_ON); > >>> - ret = _omap_save_secure_sram((u32 *) > >>> + ret = _omap_save_secure_sram((u32 *)(unsigned long) > >>> __pa(omap3_secure_ram_storage)); > >>> pwrdm_set_next_pwrst(mpu_pwrdm, mpu_next_state); > >>> /* Following is for error tracking, it should not happen */ > >> > >> Hmm maybe the function prototype should be changed instead if > >> it takes the physical address. > >> > >> How do you you reproduce this warning? I did not get it after > >> enabling LPAE in multi_v7_defconfig with current mainline. > > > > Of course. No more late night patching for me. :) Ah OK so it's in next. > Actually, that is getting a little hairy. It's a function pointer to > an assembly function, so we'd need to make it deal with the size of > phys_addr_t there. It's probably easier to just go with the original > patch here, at least I don't see much payoff from doing it the other > way. OK, please go ahead and apply: Acked-by: Tony Lindgren I'm still sorting out my fixes, and so far it looks like I don't need to touch this file. Regards, Tony