On Wednesday 29 July 2015 11:02:41 Scott Wood wrote:
> On Wed, 2015-07-29 at 10:02 +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > On Wednesday 29 July 2015 00:24:37 Scott Wood wrote:
> > > +#ifdef CONFIG_PM
> > > static void lock_tx_qs(struct gfar_private *priv)
> > > {
> > > int i;
> > > @@ -580,6 +581,7 @@ static void unlock_tx_qs(struct gfar_private *priv)
> > > for (i = 0; i < priv->num_tx_queues; i++)
> > > spin_unlock(&priv->tx_queue[i]->txlock);
> > > }
> > > +#endif
> > >
> >
> > This seems unrelated and should probably be a separate fix.
>
> It's related in that it fixes a warning -- the 64-bit build didn't have
> CONFIG_PM -- though I should have been clearer about that in the changelog.
Yes, that's what I meant: you can easily have a 32-bit build without
CONFIG_PM of course, and that would have the same problem.
> >
> > You are fixing two problems here: the warning about a size cast, and
> > the fact that the driver is using the wrong pointer. I'd suggest
> > explaining it in the changelog.
> >
> > Note that we normally rely on void pointer arithmetic in the kernel, so
> > I'd write it without the uintptr_t casts as
> >
> > bdp_dma = lower_32_bits(rx_queue->rx_bd_dma_base + (base - bdp));
>
> But those aren't void pointers, and rx_bd_dma_base isn't a pointer, so you'd
> get the wrong answer doing that.
Ah, right.
Arnd
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
