Hi Linus,
On 29-08-20, 14:20, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 29, 2020 at 1:40 PM Guenter Roeck <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > Except for
> >
> > CHECK: spaces preferred around that '+' (ctx:VxV)
> > #29: FILE: drivers/dma/fsldma.h:223:
> > + u32 val_lo = in_be32((u32 __iomem *)addr+1);
>
> Added spaces.
>
> > I don't see anything wrong with it either, so
> >
> > Reviewed-by: Guenter Roeck <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > Since I didn't see the real problem with the original code,
> > I'd take that with a grain of salt, though.
>
> Well, honestly, the old code was so confused that just making it build
> is clearly already an improvement even if everything else were to be
> wrong.
>
> So I committed my "fix". If it turns out there's more wrong in there
> and somebody tests it, we can fix it again. But now it hopefully
> compiles, at least.
>
> My bet is that if that driver ever worked on ppc32, it will continue
> to work whatever we do to that function.
>
> I _think_ the old code happened to - completely by mistake - get the
> value right for the case of "little endian access, with dma_addr_t
> being 32-bit". Because then it would still read the upper bits wrong,
> but the cast to dma_addr_t would then throw those bits away. And the
> lower bits would be right.
>
> But for big-endian accesses or for ARCH_DMA_ADDR_T_64BIT it really
> looks like it always returned a completely incorrect value.
>
> And again - the driver may have worked even with that completely
> incorrect value, since the use of it seems to be very incidental.
Thank you for the fix.
Acked-By: Vinod Koul <vkoul@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
> In either case ("it didn't work before" or "it worked because the
> value doesn't really matter"), I don't think I could possibly have
> made things worse.
>
> Famous last words.
I guess no one tested this on 32bits seems to have caused this.
--
~Vinod
