On Tue, Feb 09, 2010 at 05:52:23PM +0100, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
> [Added linux-sparse@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx to Cc:]
>
> On Tue, Feb 09, 2010 at 09:59:34AM +0000, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 09, 2010 at 10:31:29AM +0100, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
> > > > +#define io_p2v(x) ((void __iomem *) (unsigned long) IO_ADDRESS(x))
> > > Is this cast to unsigned long needed? AFAIK IO_ADDRESS(x) has
> > > type unsigned for x in { 0x0 ... 0xffffffff } (provided that int uses a
> > > 32 bit 2s-complement representation). If unsigned long is really
> > > needed, maybe put it into the IO_ADDRESS macro?
> >
> > int -> void __iomem * = sparse warning
> > unsigned long -> void __iomem * = no sparse warning
> Ah, OK, I see. But IMHO it's a poor reason to add the cast. Either
> the cast is necessary/recommended or sparse is wrong. In the first case
> the reasoning shouldn't have to do with sparse, in the latter sparse
> should be fixed.
The point is that on 64-bit architectures, a pointer may be representable
by an unsigned long, but not an int.
> Is this intended? What is the preferred way to define iomem pointers?
Define a numerical address with a UL suffix is the simplest way.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-sparse" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
