On Wed, Jul 10, 2019 at 07:57:00PM +0530, Pankaj Gupta wrote:
> This patch fixes below sparse warning related to __virtio
> type in virtio pmem driver. This is reported by Intel test
> bot on linux-next tree.
>
> nd_virtio.c:56:28: warning: incorrect type in assignment (different base types)
> nd_virtio.c:56:28: expected unsigned int [unsigned] [usertype] type
> nd_virtio.c:56:28: got restricted __virtio32
> nd_virtio.c:93:59: warning: incorrect type in argument 2 (different base types)
> nd_virtio.c:93:59: expected restricted __virtio32 [usertype] val
> nd_virtio.c:93:59: got unsigned int [unsigned] [usertype] ret
>
> Signed-off-by: Pankaj Gupta <pagupta@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Reported-by: kbuild test robot <lkp@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>
> This fixes a warning, so submitting it as a separate
> patch on top of virtio pmem series.
>
> include/uapi/linux/virtio_pmem.h | 4 ++--
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/virtio_pmem.h b/include/uapi/linux/virtio_pmem.h
> index efcd72f2d20d..f89129bf1f84 100644
> --- a/include/uapi/linux/virtio_pmem.h
> +++ b/include/uapi/linux/virtio_pmem.h
> @@ -23,12 +23,12 @@ struct virtio_pmem_config {
>
> struct virtio_pmem_resp {
> /* Host return status corresponding to flush request */
> - __u32 ret;
> + __virtio32 ret;
> };
>
> struct virtio_pmem_req {
> /* command type */
> - __u32 type;
> + __virtio32 type;
> };
>
> #endif
req/resp are in memory right?
Then this looks like a wrong fix.
The accessors should all use cpu_to/from_le
and they types should be __le32.
> --
> 2.20.1
_______________________________________________
Virtualization mailing list
Virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
