Hi Mathieu,
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] remoteproc: coredump: correct argument 2 type for
> memcpy_fromio
>
> Hi Peng,
>
> On Wed, Nov 10, 2021 at 11:21:01AM +0800, Peng Fan (OSS) wrote:
> > From: Peng Fan <peng.fan@xxxxxxx>
> >
> > Address the sparse check warning:
> > >> drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_coredump.c:169:53:
> > sparse: warning: incorrect type in argument 2 (different address spaces)
> > sparse: expected void const volatile [noderef] __iomem *src
> > sparse: got void *[assigned] ptr
> >
> > Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@xxxxxxxxx>
> > Signed-off-by: Peng Fan <peng.fan@xxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_coredump.c | 2 +-
> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_coredump.c
> b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_coredump.c
> > index aee657cc08c6..f39c98aa1b49 100644
> > --- a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_coredump.c
> > +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_coredump.c
> > @@ -166,7 +166,7 @@ static void rproc_copy_segment(struct rproc *rproc,
> void *dest,
> > memset(dest, 0xff, size);
> > } else {
> > if (is_iomem)
> > - memcpy_fromio(dest, ptr, size);
> > + memcpy_fromio(dest, (void const __iomem *)ptr, size);
>
> Shouldn't this be (const void __iomem *) to respect the signature in [1]?
The sparse shows" sparse: expected void const volatile [noderef] __iomem *src"
I just send out V2 following your suggestion.
Thanks,
Peng.
>
> [1].
> https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Felixir.b
> ootlin.com%2Flinux%2Flatest%2Fsource%2Finclude%2Fasm-generic%2Flogic_
> io.h%23L71&data=04%7C01%7Cpeng.fan%40nxp.com%7C8c6a9d750ea
> 94f5b09c508d9a931938f%7C686ea1d3bc2b4c6fa92cd99c5c301635%7C0%7
> C0%7C637726852658866042%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4
> wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&a
> mp;sdata=%2BBIKI5lOdwketjCiNhR3YLyK1xx9o7NhPuuLpjGU7J4%3D&r
> eserved=0
>
> > else
> > memcpy(dest, ptr, size);
> > }
> > --
> > 2.25.1
> >
