From: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
To: Ionela Voinescu <ionela.voinescu@arm.com>
Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>,
kbuild-all@lists.01.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>
Subject: Re: arch/arm64/kernel/topology.c:367:22: sparse: sparse: dereference of noderef expression
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 2021 16:13:53 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210106161353.GC3579531@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210106155214.GA30892@arm.com>
On Wed, Jan 06, 2021 at 03:52:14PM +0000, Ionela Voinescu wrote:
> > > > > vim +367 arch/arm64/kernel/topology.c
> > > > >
> > > > > 362
> > > > > 363 int cpc_read_ffh(int cpu, struct cpc_reg *reg, u64 *val)
> > > > > 364 {
> > > > > 365 int ret = -EOPNOTSUPP;
> > > > > 366
> > > > > > 367 switch ((u64)reg->address) {
> > > >
> > > > That's not a dereference but I guess sparse complains of dropping the
> > > > __iomem. We could change the cast to (__force u64) to silence sparse.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks for the report.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Nothing I've tried seemed to silence sparse here, including casting to
> > > (__force u64).
> >
> > Would it work if we changed the case lines to (u64 __iomem)0x0?
> >
>
> No, it does not. We still get the same warning on the switch line even
> if there is no cast. Same if we directly check for:
>
> if (reg->address == (u64 __iomem)0x0)
Folks, could you stop with the voodoo? This u64 __iomem address thing is completely
wrong. What it says is "address of that field shall be an iomem pointer",
which makes no sense whatsoever.
Just what had been intended? __iomem is a qualifier of the same sort
as const or volatile - this mess makes as much sense as
struct cpc_reg {
u8 descriptor;
u16 length;
u8 space_id;
u8 bit_width;
u8 bit_offset;
u8 access_width;
u64 const address;
} __packed;
Which would *NOT* be read as "reg->address is a numeric representation of
address of something unmodifiable" - it would be "the value stored in
reg->address can not be modified".
This annotation says "reg->address (somehow) lives in iomem", resulting in
"so why the hell are you trying to read it by plain dereferencing of
reg + field offset?" from sparse.
Get rid of this misannotation and don't breed force-cast to confuse
everything hard enough to STFU.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-01-06 16:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-12-17 21:00 arch/arm64/kernel/topology.c:367:22: sparse: sparse: dereference of noderef expression kernel test robot
2020-12-18 10:44 ` Catalin Marinas
2021-01-06 15:07 ` Ionela Voinescu
2021-01-06 15:21 ` Catalin Marinas
2021-01-06 15:52 ` Ionela Voinescu
2021-01-06 16:13 ` Al Viro [this message]
2021-01-06 16:47 ` Ionela Voinescu
2021-01-06 17:47 ` Al Viro
2021-01-06 20:12 ` Ionela Voinescu
2021-01-06 20:46 ` Al Viro
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2021-01-06 5:50 kernel test robot
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=20210106161353.GC3579531@ZenIV.linux.org.uk \
--to=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=ionela.voinescu@arm.com \
--cc=kbuild-all@lists.01.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lkp@intel.com \
--cc=sudeep.holla@arm.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox