Le 24/03/2021 à 10:29, Alexandre Belloni a écrit :
On 24/03/2021 05:09:39-0400, He Ying wrote:
We found these warnings in arch/powerpc/kernel/time.c as follows:
warning: symbol 'decrementer_max' was not declared. Should it be static?
warning: symbol 'rtc_lock' was not declared. Should it be static?
warning: symbol 'dtl_consumer' was not declared. Should it be static?
Declare 'decrementer_max' in powerpc asm/time.h.
Include linux/mc146818rtc.h in powerpc kernel/time.c where 'rtc_lock'
is declared. And remove duplicated declaration of 'rtc_lock' in powerpc
platforms/chrp/time.c because it has included linux/mc146818rtc.h.
Move 'dtl_consumer' definition behind "include <asm/dtl.h>" because it
is declared there.
Reported-by: Hulk Robot <hul...@huawei.com>
Signed-off-by: He Ying <heyin...@huawei.com>
---
V2:
- Instead of including linux/mc146818rtc.h in powerpc kernel/time.c, declare
rtc_lock in powerpc asm/time.h.
V3:
- Recover to V1, that is including linux/mc146818rtc.h in powerpc
kernel/time.c. And remove duplicated declaration of 'rtc_lock' in powerpc
platforms/chrp/time.c because it has included linux/mc146818rtc.h.
arch/powerpc/include/asm/time.h | 1 +
arch/powerpc/kernel/time.c | 9 ++++-----
arch/powerpc/platforms/chrp/time.c | 2 --
3 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/time.h b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/time.h
index 8dd3cdb25338..2cd2b50bedda 100644
--- a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/time.h
+++ b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/time.h
@@ -22,6 +22,7 @@ extern unsigned long tb_ticks_per_jiffy;
extern unsigned long tb_ticks_per_usec;
extern unsigned long tb_ticks_per_sec;
extern struct clock_event_device decrementer_clockevent;
+extern u64 decrementer_max;
extern void generic_calibrate_decr(void);
diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kernel/time.c b/arch/powerpc/kernel/time.c
index b67d93a609a2..ac81f043bf49 100644
--- a/arch/powerpc/kernel/time.c
+++ b/arch/powerpc/kernel/time.c
@@ -55,8 +55,9 @@
#include <linux/sched/cputime.h>
#include <linux/sched/clock.h>
#include <linux/processor.h>
-#include <asm/trace.h>
+#include <linux/mc146818rtc.h>
I'm fine with that but I really think my suggestion to make the rtc_lock
local to the platforms was better because it is only used to synchronize
between concurrent invocations of chrp_set_rtc_time or
maple_set_rtc_time. The rtc core will never do that and the only case
would be concurrent calls to rtc_ops.set_time and
update_persistent_clock64 (which should also be removed at some point).
I agree but I think it must be done carefully. If the lock is local to the driver really and without
a link with the RTC core, then the lock var should probably be static. But then we'll have name
conflict with the global rtc_lock which is declared in <linux/mc146818rtc.h>
All this is not easy, and I like your idea in the other mail to really clean up the rtc core and
remove this global rtc_lock completely.
For the time being I guess the fix provided by this patch is just semantic and is just fine as is,
as there is no real bug behind the messages from sparse.
Christophe
