From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751912AbcCARKc (ORCPT ); Tue, 1 Mar 2016 12:10:32 -0500 Received: from utopia.booyaka.com ([74.50.51.50]:47781 "EHLO utopia.booyaka.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750921AbcCARKa (ORCPT ); Tue, 1 Mar 2016 12:10:30 -0500 Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2016 17:10:29 +0000 (UTC) From: Paul Walmsley To: Bjorn Andersson , Andy Gross cc: David Brown , linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-soc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] soc: qcom: smp2p: Use memset_io to zero out new entries In-Reply-To: <20160225220224.GA9986@hector.attlocal.net> Message-ID: References: <1456417057-17591-1-git-send-email-bjorn.andersson@linaro.org> <20160225220224.GA9986@hector.attlocal.net> User-Agent: Alpine 2.02 (DEB 1266 2009-07-14) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 25 Feb 2016, Andy Gross wrote: > On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 08:17:37AM -0800, Bjorn Andersson wrote: > > Signed-off-by: Bjorn Andersson > > --- > > drivers/soc/qcom/smp2p.c | 2 +- > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/soc/qcom/smp2p.c b/drivers/soc/qcom/smp2p.c > > index f1eed7f9dd67..61df598444e6 100644 > > --- a/drivers/soc/qcom/smp2p.c > > +++ b/drivers/soc/qcom/smp2p.c > > @@ -379,7 +379,7 @@ static int qcom_smp2p_alloc_outbound_item(struct qcom_smp2p *smp2p) > > return PTR_ERR(out); > > } > > > > - memset(out, 0, sizeof(*out)); > > + memset_io(out, 0, sizeof(*out)); > > out->magic = SMP2P_MAGIC; > > out->local_pid = smp2p->local_pid; > > out->remote_pid = smp2p->remote_pid; > > Good catch. I'll add this fix for the pull. Folks, is qmem_smem_get() intended to return pointers to device-mapped memory, as implied by this change? If so, shouldn't the return type of qmem_smem_get() et al. be void __iomem * rather than void *? - Paul