On Mon, Sep 2, 2024 at 12:33 PM Daniel Lezcano
<daniel.lezcano@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 02/09/2024 12:11, Uros Bizjak wrote:
On Mon, Sep 2, 2024 at 11:17 AM Daniel Lezcano
<daniel.lezcano@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 30/07/2024 15:20, Uros Bizjak wrote:
Use request_percpu_irq() instead of request_irq() to solve
the following sparse warning:
jcore-pit.c:173:40: warning: incorrect type in argument 5 (different address spaces)
jcore-pit.c:173:40: expected void *dev
jcore-pit.c:173:40: got struct jcore_pit [noderef] __percpu *static [assigned] [toplevel] jcore_pit_percpu
Compile tested only.
Signed-off-by: Uros Bizjak <ubizjak@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@xxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
Added Rich Felker in Cc
Applied, thanks
I think we also need the following patch, since we changed request_irq
to request_percpu_irq:
Hmm, I think you are right:
I would say it is:
static irqreturn_t jcore_timer_interrupt(int irq, void *dev_id)
{
struct jcore_pit *pit = dev_id;
OR
struct jcore_pit *pit = this_cpu_ptr(jcore_pit_percpu);
[ ... ]
}
The former the better for the encapsulation.
Do you mind to update the patch ?
Done, v2 with changed jcore_timer_interrupt() was just sent.
Sorry for the inconvenience.