On Mon, Jul 27, 2020 at 10:30 AM John Garry <[email protected]> wrote: > On 27/07/2020 09:04, Arnd Bergmann wrote:> On Sun, Jul 26, 2020 at 2:53 > PM Stafford Horne <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >> On Sun, Jul 26, 2020 at 12:00:37PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > >>> On Sun, Jul 26, 2020 at 6:14 AM Stafford Horne <[email protected]> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> The return type of functions _inb, _inw and _inl are all u16 which looks > >>>> wrong. This patch makes them u8, u16 and u32 respectively. > >>>> > >>>> The original commit text for these does not indicate that these should > >>>> be all forced to u16. > >>> > >>> Is it in alight with all architectures? that support this interface > >>> natively? > >>> > >>> (Return value is arch-dependent AFAIU, so it might actually return > >>> 16-bit for byte read, but I agree that this is weird for 32-bit value. > >>> I think you have elaborate more in the commit message) > >> > >> Well, this is the generic io code, at least these api's appear to not be > >> different > >> for each architecture. The output read by the architecture dependant code > >> i.e. > >> __raw_readb() below is getting is placed into a u8. So I think the output > >> of > >> the function will be u8. > >> > >> static inline u8 _inb(unsigned long addr) > >> { > >> u8 val; > >> > >> __io_pbr(); > >> val = __raw_readb(PCI_IOBASE + addr); > >> __io_par(val); > >> return val; > >> } > >> > >> I can expand the commit text, but I would like to get some comments from > >> the > >> original author to confirm if this is an issue. > > > > I think your original version is fine, this was clearly just a typo and I've > > applied your fix now and will forward it to Linus in the next few days, > > giving John the chance to add his Ack or further comments. > > > > Thanks a lot for spotting it and sending a fix. > > Thanks Arnd. > > Yeah, these looks like copy+paste errors on my part: > > Reviewed-by: John Garry <[email protected]>
Thanks! > > I'll give this patch a spin, but not expecting any differences (since > original seems ok). > > Note that kbuild robot also reported this: > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/202007140549.j7x9bvpt%[email protected]/ > > Extract: > > include/asm-generic/io.h:521:22: sparse: sparse: incorrect type in > argument 1 (different base types) @@ expected unsigned int > [usertype] value @@ got restricted __le32 [usertype] @@ > include/asm-generic/io.h:521:22: sparse: expected unsigned int > [usertype] value > include/asm-generic/io.h:521:22: sparse: got restricted __le32 > [usertype] > > But they look like issues which were in the existing code. Yes, this driver code (atm/ambassador.c) seems to have been broken that way since it was merged in 1999. Arnd
