On Tue, Jul 4, 2023, at 08:54, Christian König wrote:
> Am 03.07.23 um 14:35 schrieb Arnd Bergmann:
>> From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx>
>>
>> On 32-bit architectures comparing a resource against a value larger than
>> U32_MAX can cause a warning:
>>
>> drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_device.c:1344:18: error: result of comparison of constant 4294967296 with expression of type 'resource_size_t' (aka 'unsigned int') is always false [-Werror,-Wtautological-constant-out-of-range-compare]
>> res->start > 0x100000000ull)
>> ~~~~~~~~~~ ^ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>>
>> The compiler is right that this cannot happen in this configuration, which
>> is ok, so just add a cast to shut up the warning.
>
> Well it doesn't make sense to compile that driver on systems with only
> 32bit phys_addr_t in the first place.
Not sure I understand the specific requirement. Do you mean the entire
amdgpu driver requires 64-bit BAR addressing, or just the bits that
resize the BARs?
> It might be cleaner to just not build the whole driver on such systems
> or at least leave out this function.
How about this version? This also addresses the build failure, but
I don't know if this makes any sense:
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_device.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_device.c
@@ -1325,6 +1325,9 @@ int amdgpu_device_resize_fb_bar(struct amdgpu_device *adev)
u16 cmd;
int r;
+ if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PHYS_ADDR_T_64BIT))
+ return 0;
+
/* Bypass for VF */
if (amdgpu_sriov_vf(adev))
return 0;
Arnd
