Hi Mukesh,

kernel test robot noticed the following build warnings:

[auto build test WARNING on remoteproc/rproc-next]
[also build test WARNING on robh/for-next linus/master v6.12-rc1 next-20241004]
[If your patch is applied to the wrong git tree, kindly drop us a note.
And when submitting patch, we suggest to use '--base' as documented in
https://git-scm.com/docs/git-format-patch#_base_tree_information]

url:    
https://github.com/intel-lab-lkp/linux/commits/Mukesh-Ojha/dt-bindings-remoteproc-qcom-pas-common-Introduce-iommus-and-qcom-devmem-property/20241005-052733
base:   https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/remoteproc/linux.git 
rproc-next
patch link:    
https://lore.kernel.org/r/20241004212359.2263502-3-quic_mojha%40quicinc.com
patch subject: [PATCH 2/6] remoteproc: qcom: Add iommu map_unmap helper function
config: arm-allmodconfig 
(https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20241006/202410061256.kv3ebd7h-...@intel.com/config)
compiler: arm-linux-gnueabi-gcc (GCC) 14.1.0
reproduce (this is a W=1 build): 
(https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20241006/202410061256.kv3ebd7h-...@intel.com/reproduce)

If you fix the issue in a separate patch/commit (i.e. not just a new version of
the same patch/commit), kindly add following tags
| Reported-by: kernel test robot <l...@intel.com>
| Closes: 
https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202410061256.kv3ebd7h-...@intel.com/

All warnings (new ones prefixed by >>):

   drivers/remoteproc/qcom_common.c: In function 'qcom_map_unmap_carveout':
>> drivers/remoteproc/qcom_common.c:645:38: warning: left shift count >= width 
>> of type [-Wshift-count-overflow]
     645 |                 iova |= (sid_def_val << 32);
         |                                      ^~

Kconfig warnings: (for reference only)
   WARNING: unmet direct dependencies detected for GET_FREE_REGION
   Depends on [n]: SPARSEMEM [=n]
   Selected by [m]:
   - RESOURCE_KUNIT_TEST [=m] && RUNTIME_TESTING_MENU [=y] && KUNIT [=m]


vim +645 drivers/remoteproc/qcom_common.c

   611  
   612  /**
   613   * qcom_map_unmap_carveout() - iommu map and unmap carveout region
   614   *
   615   * @rproc:      rproc handle
   616   * @mem_phys:   starting physical address of carveout region
   617   * @mem_size:   size of carveout region
   618   * @map:        if true, map otherwise, unmap
   619   * @use_sid:    decision to append sid to iova
   620   * @sid:        SID value
   621   */
   622  int qcom_map_unmap_carveout(struct rproc *rproc, phys_addr_t mem_phys, 
size_t mem_size,
   623                              bool map, bool use_sid, unsigned long sid)
   624  {
   625          unsigned long iova = mem_phys;
   626          unsigned long sid_def_val;
   627          int ret;
   628  
   629          if (!rproc->has_iommu)
   630                  return 0;
   631  
   632          if (!rproc->domain)
   633                  return -EINVAL;
   634  
   635          /*
   636           * Remote processor like ADSP supports upto 36 bit device
   637           * address space and some of its clients like fastrpc uses
   638           * upper 32-35 bits to keep lower 4 bits of its SID to use
   639           * larger address space. To keep this consistent across other
   640           * use cases add remoteproc SID configuration for firmware
   641           * to IOMMU for carveouts.
   642           */
   643          if (use_sid && sid) {
   644                  sid_def_val = sid & SID_MASK_DEFAULT;
 > 645                  iova |= (sid_def_val << 32);
   646          }
   647  
   648          if (map)
   649                  ret = iommu_map(rproc->domain, iova, mem_phys, 
mem_size, IOMMU_READ | IOMMU_WRITE, GFP_KERNEL);
   650          else
   651                  ret = iommu_unmap(rproc->domain, iova, mem_size);
   652  
   653          if (ret)
   654                  dev_err(&rproc->dev, "Unable to %s IOVA Memory, ret: 
%d\n",
   655                          map ? "map" : "unmap", ret);
   656  
   657          return ret;
   658  }
   659  EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(qcom_map_unmap_carveout);
   660  

-- 
0-DAY CI Kernel Test Service
https://github.com/intel/lkp-tests/wiki

Reply via email to