Re: [PATCH v2 2/5] ACPI / boot: Correct address space of __acpi_map_table()

From: Hanjun Guo
Date: Tue Jul 18 2017 - 05:49:37 EST


On 2017/7/17 21:29, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> Sparse complains about wrong address space used in __acpi_map_table()
> and in __acpi_unmap_table().
>
> arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c:127:29: warning: incorrect type in return expression (different address spaces)
> arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c:127:29: expected char *
> arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c:127:29: got void [noderef] <asn:2>*
> arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c:135:23: warning: incorrect type in argument 1 (different address spaces)
> arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c:135:23: expected void [noderef] <asn:2>*addr
> arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c:135:23: got char *map
>
> Correct address space to be in align of type of returned and passed
> parameter.
>
> Signed-off-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> arch/arm64/kernel/acpi.c | 4 ++--
> arch/ia64/kernel/acpi.c | 4 ++--
> arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c | 4 ++--
> include/linux/acpi.h | 4 ++--
> 4 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/acpi.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/acpi.c
> index e25c11e727fe..b3162715ed78 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/acpi.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/acpi.c
> @@ -95,7 +95,7 @@ static int __init dt_scan_depth1_nodes(unsigned long node,
> * __acpi_map_table() will be called before page_init(), so early_ioremap()
> * or early_memremap() should be called here to for ACPI table mapping.
> */
> -char *__init __acpi_map_table(unsigned long phys, unsigned long size)
> +void __init __iomem *__acpi_map_table(unsigned long phys, unsigned long size)
> {
> if (!size)
> return NULL;
> @@ -103,7 +103,7 @@ char *__init __acpi_map_table(unsigned long phys, unsigned long size)
> return early_memremap(phys, size);
> }
>
> -void __init __acpi_unmap_table(char *map, unsigned long size)
> +void __init __acpi_unmap_table(void __iomem *map, unsigned long size)
> {
> if (!map || !size)
> return;
> diff --git a/arch/ia64/kernel/acpi.c b/arch/ia64/kernel/acpi.c
> index 7508c306aa9e..b9388cc283bc 100644
> --- a/arch/ia64/kernel/acpi.c
> +++ b/arch/ia64/kernel/acpi.c
> @@ -159,12 +159,12 @@ int acpi_request_vector(u32 int_type)
> return vector;
> }
>
> -char *__init __acpi_map_table(unsigned long phys_addr, unsigned long size)
> +void __init __iomem *__acpi_map_table(unsigned long phys, unsigned long size)
> {
> return __va(phys_addr);
> }
>
> -void __init __acpi_unmap_table(char *map, unsigned long size)
> +void __init __acpi_unmap_table(void __iomem *map, unsigned long size)
> {
> }
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c b/arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c
> index 09ddb3cd627a..6d5b1346268a 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c
> @@ -118,7 +118,7 @@ static u32 isa_irq_to_gsi[NR_IRQS_LEGACY] __read_mostly = {
> * This is just a simple wrapper around early_ioremap(),
> * with sanity checks for phys == 0 and size == 0.
> */
> -char *__init __acpi_map_table(unsigned long phys, unsigned long size)
> +void __init __iomem *__acpi_map_table(unsigned long phys, unsigned long size)
> {
>
> if (!phys || !size)
> @@ -127,7 +127,7 @@ char *__init __acpi_map_table(unsigned long phys, unsigned long size)
> return early_ioremap(phys, size);
> }
>
> -void __init __acpi_unmap_table(char *map, unsigned long size)
> +void __init __acpi_unmap_table(void __iomem *map, unsigned long size)
> {
> if (!map || !size)
> return;
> diff --git a/include/linux/acpi.h b/include/linux/acpi.h
> index c749eef1daa1..3848b56fcd83 100644
> --- a/include/linux/acpi.h
> +++ b/include/linux/acpi.h
> @@ -228,8 +228,8 @@ struct acpi_subtable_proc {
> int count;
> };
>
> -char * __acpi_map_table (unsigned long phys_addr, unsigned long size);
> -void __acpi_unmap_table(char *map, unsigned long size);
> +void __iomem *__acpi_map_table(unsigned long phys_addr, unsigned long size);
> +void __acpi_unmap_table(void __iomem *map, unsigned long size);
> int early_acpi_boot_init(void);
> int acpi_boot_init (void);
> void acpi_boot_table_init (void);

Thanks for the update,

Reviewed-by: Hanjun Guo <guohanjun@xxxxxxxxxx>

Thanks
Hanjun