On Fri, Sep 9, 2022 at 8:03 PM Greg KH <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Sep 09, 2022 at 02:17:55PM +0200, Nam Cao wrote:
> > Remove volatile qualifier for the member rd0 of struct vnt_rx_desc,
> > because there is no reason it must be volatile.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Nam Cao <namcaov@xxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > drivers/staging/vt6655/desc.h | 2 +-
> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/staging/vt6655/desc.h b/drivers/staging/vt6655/desc.h
> > index 17a40c53b8ff..3f0f287b1693 100644
> > --- a/drivers/staging/vt6655/desc.h
> > +++ b/drivers/staging/vt6655/desc.h
> > @@ -182,7 +182,7 @@ struct vnt_rdes1 {
> >
> > /* Rx descriptor*/
> > struct vnt_rx_desc {
> > - volatile struct vnt_rdes0 rd0;
> > + struct vnt_rdes0 rd0;
>
> You can not just remove this without describing _WHY_ it is ok to do so.
>
> Have you properly determined why it is, or is not, ok to use volatile
> here?
I did not carefully look at the volatile usage here. After looking at it
again, using volatile is actually valid: the structure resides on coherent
memory.
Sorry for being careless.
Best regards,
Nam
