15 May
2015
15 May
'15
6:57 p.m.
On Friday 15 May 2015 11:21:05 Timur Tabi wrote:
On 05/15/2015 08:20 AM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
Do you get a sparse warning if you either leave the __le32, or if you turn it into u32?
After removing the cpu_to_le32 calls, but keeping the __le32 in the structs, I get no sparse warnings on my driver.
Ok, good. I've also checked the readl() definition and found that it has a (__force __le32) cast, while __raw_readl() takes a const volatile void __iomem *addr) pointer, so it sparse won't warn either way, but that's probably ok.
Arnd