On 5/11/24 12:29, Victor Shih wrote: > From: Victor Shih <victor.shih@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > There is a type issue in the assignment in the sd_uhs2_dev_init() > that will generate a warning when building the kernel. > > Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@xxxxxxxxx> > Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202411051248.wvjHSFNj-lkp@xxxxxxxxx/ > Signed-off-by: Ben Chuang <ben.chuang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Signed-off-by: Victor Shih <victor.shih@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> It is OK for now, so: Acked-by: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@xxxxxxxxx> However it looks like in some other cases, the payload byte order is wrong, but the value is zero which works anyway. The UHS-II spec is a bit confusing because it says the DWORDs are big endian, but the registers are 64-bits, so does that mean the payload byte order is 3,2,1,0,7,6,5,4 ? Perhaps someone could check. I don't have time right now, sorry. > --- > drivers/mmc/core/sd_uhs2.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/mmc/core/sd_uhs2.c b/drivers/mmc/core/sd_uhs2.c > index c5847a2084d5..1c31d0dfa961 100644 > --- a/drivers/mmc/core/sd_uhs2.c > +++ b/drivers/mmc/core/sd_uhs2.c > @@ -181,7 +181,7 @@ static int sd_uhs2_dev_init(struct mmc_host *host) > UHS2_DEV_INIT_COMPLETE_FLAG | > ((gd & 0xF) << 4) | > (gap & 0xF); > - uhs2_cmd.payload[0] = payload0; > + uhs2_cmd.payload[0] = (__force __be32)payload0; > > sd_uhs2_cmd_assemble(&cmd, &uhs2_cmd, UHS2_DEV_INIT_PAYLOAD_LEN, > UHS2_DEV_INIT_RESP_LEN);
