From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============5650199184784168888==" MIME-Version: 1.0 From: Chen Yu To: lkp@lists.01.org Subject: Re: Fwd: [linux-next:master 12558/13205] drivers/thermal/intel/int340x_thermal/processor_thermal_rapl.c:96:50: sparse: sparse: cast removes address space '__iomem' of expression Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2020 14:44:23 +0800 Message-ID: <20201215064421.GA25351@chenyu-office.sh.intel.com> In-Reply-To: <5b3ef6c8104abf8c6cbcf84e2ccf59ff173a595d.camel@intel.com> List-Id: --===============5650199184784168888== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi lkp experts, On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 11:02:11PM +0800, Zhang Rui wrote: > On Mon, 2020-12-14 at 15:44 +0800, Chen Yu wrote: > > On Sun, Dec 13, 2020 at 11:32:50PM -0800, Srinivas Pandruvada wrote: > > > On Mon, 2020-12-14 at 15:33 +0800, Chen Yu wrote: > > > > On Sun, Dec 13, 2020 at 02:28:03PM -0800, Srinivas Pandruvada > > > > wrote: > > > > > = > > > > > -------- Forwarded Message -------- > > > > > From: kernel test robot > > > > > To: Srinivas Pandruvada > > > > > = > > > > > "sparse warnings: (new ones prefixed by >>)" > > > > > > > drivers/thermal/intel/int340x_thermal/processor_thermal_rap > > > > > > > l.c: > > > > > > > 96:5 > > > > > > > 0: sparse: sparse: cast removes address space '__iomem' of > > > > > > > expression > > > > > = > > > > > = > > > > > 100 rapl_mmio_priv.reg_unit =3D (u64)proc_priv- > > > > > >mmio_base > > > > > + > > > > > rapl_regs->reg_unit; > > > > > = > > > > = > > > > The reason for this warning is because proc_priv->mmio_base is of > > > > __iomem > > > > attribute that can be used by sparse to detect if there is ilegal > > > > access(only > > > > device memory region is legal). Removing this attribute would > > > > cause > > > > potential > > > > problems. A clean fix would be changing rapl_mmio_priv.reg_unit > > > > to > > > > void *__iomem > > > > and remove the (u64) cast, but that would also involve changes in > > > > struct rapl_if_priv > > > > and struct reg_action. What do you think, Rui? > > = > > And if within this code we know it is a safe cast, the following > > change > > might help to prevent parse from complaining: > > - rapl_mmio_priv.reg_unit =3D (u64)proc_priv->mmio_base + > > rapl_regs->reg_unit; > > + rapl_mmio_priv.reg_unit =3D (u64 __force)proc_priv->mmio_base + > > rapl_regs->reg_unit; > > = > we can check with LKP team tomorrow. > It looks like we could not reproduce this sparse issue locally, but it should be a valid report. May I know how we can verify in lkp that a fix works(suppose we propose a patch)? thanks, Chenyu > thanks, > rui --===============5650199184784168888==--