From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Christoph Hellwig Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2018 11:43:34 +0000 Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/5] sh: split arch/sh/mm/consistent.c Message-Id: <20180724114334.GA21973@lst.de> List-Id: References: <20180719130516.1989-1-hch@lst.de> <20180719130516.1989-5-hch@lst.de> <20180723084207.GI6784@w540> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Geert Uytterhoeven Cc: Thomas Petazzoni , Jacopo Mondi , Rich Felker , lkp-ral2JQCrhuEAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org, Yoshinori Sato , Linux-sh list , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Linux IOMMU , Jacopo Mondi , Christoph Hellwig On Mon, Jul 23, 2018 at 10:49:39AM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > > > + *dma_handle = virt_to_phys(ret); > > > + if (!WARN_ON(!dev)) > > > + *dma_handle - PFN_PHYS(dev->dma_pfn_offset); > > vs > > > - *dma_handle = virt_to_phys(ret); > > > - if (!WARN_ON(!dev)) > > > - *dma_handle -= PFN_PHYS(dev->dma_pfn_offset); > > Doesn't look right to me, neither. > > No complaints for 0day? My gcc says: > > error: statement with no effect [-Werror=unused-value] For some reason 0day has failed me multiple times for sh. Does the 0day bot even cover sh at all?