[PATCH] m68k: Fix virt_addr_valid() W=1 compiler warnings

[PATCH] m68k: Fix virt_addr_valid() W=1 compiler warnings

[Geert Uytterhoeven]

If CONFIG_DEBUG_SG=y, and CONFIG_MMU=y:

    include/linux/scatterlist.h: In function ‘sg_set_buf’:
    arch/m68k/include/asm/page_mm.h:174:49: warning: ordered comparison of pointer with null pointer [-Wextra]
      174 | #define virt_addr_valid(kaddr) ((void *)(kaddr) >= (void *)PAGE_OFFSET && (void *)(kaddr) < high_memory)
	  |                                                 ^~

or CONFIG_MMU=n:

    include/linux/scatterlist.h: In function ‘sg_set_buf’:
    arch/m68k/include/asm/page_no.h:33:50: warning: ordered comparison of pointer with null pointer [-Wextra]
       33 | #define virt_addr_valid(kaddr) (((void *)(kaddr) >= (void *)PAGE_OFFSET) && \
	  |                                                  ^~

Fix this by doing the comparison in the "unsigned long" instead of the
"void *" domain.

Note that for now this is only seen when compiling btrfs, due to commit
e9aa7c285d20a69c ("btrfs: enable W=1 checks for btrfs"), but as people
are doing more W=1 compile testing, it will start to show up elsewhere,
too.

Signed-off-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>
---
Probably we want this as a fix for v5.12, to avoid the build bots
nagging about it all the time?

 arch/m68k/include/asm/page_mm.h | 2 +-
 arch/m68k/include/asm/page_no.h | 4 ++--
 2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/m68k/include/asm/page_mm.h b/arch/m68k/include/asm/page_mm.h
index 7f5912af2a52ea0a..9b1672f9b2e22cdf 100644
--- a/arch/m68k/include/asm/page_mm.h
+++ b/arch/m68k/include/asm/page_mm.h
@@ -171,7 +171,7 @@ static inline __attribute_const__ int __virt_to_node_shift(void)
 #include <asm-generic/memory_model.h>
 #endif
 
-#define virt_addr_valid(kaddr)	((void *)(kaddr) >= (void *)PAGE_OFFSET && (void *)(kaddr) < high_memory)
+#define virt_addr_valid(kaddr)	((unsigned long)(kaddr) >= PAGE_OFFSET && ((unsigned long)kaddr) < (unsigned long)high_memory)
 #define pfn_valid(pfn)		virt_addr_valid(pfn_to_virt(pfn))
 
 #endif /* __ASSEMBLY__ */
diff --git a/arch/m68k/include/asm/page_no.h b/arch/m68k/include/asm/page_no.h
index 6bbe52025de3c5c6..8d0f862ee9d79532 100644
--- a/arch/m68k/include/asm/page_no.h
+++ b/arch/m68k/include/asm/page_no.h
@@ -30,8 +30,8 @@ extern unsigned long memory_end;
 #define page_to_pfn(page)	virt_to_pfn(page_to_virt(page))
 #define pfn_valid(pfn)	        ((pfn) < max_mapnr)
 
-#define	virt_addr_valid(kaddr)	(((void *)(kaddr) >= (void *)PAGE_OFFSET) && \
-				((void *)(kaddr) < (void *)memory_end))
+#define	virt_addr_valid(kaddr)	(((unsigned long)(kaddr) >= PAGE_OFFSET) && \
+				((unsigned long)(kaddr) < memory_end))
 
 #endif /* __ASSEMBLY__ */
 
-- 
2.25.1

Re: [PATCH] m68k: Fix virt_addr_valid() W=1 compiler warnings

[Greg Ungerer]

On 23/2/21 8:49 pm, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> If CONFIG_DEBUG_SG=y, and CONFIG_MMU=y:
> 
>      include/linux/scatterlist.h: In function ‘sg_set_buf’:
>      arch/m68k/include/asm/page_mm.h:174:49: warning: ordered comparison of pointer with null pointer [-Wextra]
>        174 | #define virt_addr_valid(kaddr) ((void *)(kaddr) >= (void *)PAGE_OFFSET && (void *)(kaddr) < high_memory)
> 	  |                                                 ^~
> 
> or CONFIG_MMU=n:
> 
>      include/linux/scatterlist.h: In function ‘sg_set_buf’:
>      arch/m68k/include/asm/page_no.h:33:50: warning: ordered comparison of pointer with null pointer [-Wextra]
>         33 | #define virt_addr_valid(kaddr) (((void *)(kaddr) >= (void *)PAGE_OFFSET) && \
> 	  |                                                  ^~
> 
> Fix this by doing the comparison in the "unsigned long" instead of the
> "void *" domain.
> 
> Note that for now this is only seen when compiling btrfs, due to commit
> e9aa7c285d20a69c ("btrfs: enable W=1 checks for btrfs"), but as people
> are doing more W=1 compile testing, it will start to show up elsewhere,
> too.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>

Acked-by: Greg Ungerer <gerg@linux-m68k.org>


> ---
> Probably we want this as a fix for v5.12, to avoid the build bots
> nagging about it all the time?
> 
>   arch/m68k/include/asm/page_mm.h | 2 +-
>   arch/m68k/include/asm/page_no.h | 4 ++--
>   2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/m68k/include/asm/page_mm.h b/arch/m68k/include/asm/page_mm.h
> index 7f5912af2a52ea0a..9b1672f9b2e22cdf 100644
> --- a/arch/m68k/include/asm/page_mm.h
> +++ b/arch/m68k/include/asm/page_mm.h
> @@ -171,7 +171,7 @@ static inline __attribute_const__ int __virt_to_node_shift(void)
>   #include <asm-generic/memory_model.h>
>   #endif
>   
> -#define virt_addr_valid(kaddr)	((void *)(kaddr) >= (void *)PAGE_OFFSET && (void *)(kaddr) < high_memory)
> +#define virt_addr_valid(kaddr)	((unsigned long)(kaddr) >= PAGE_OFFSET && ((unsigned long)kaddr) < (unsigned long)high_memory)
>   #define pfn_valid(pfn)		virt_addr_valid(pfn_to_virt(pfn))
>   
>   #endif /* __ASSEMBLY__ */
> diff --git a/arch/m68k/include/asm/page_no.h b/arch/m68k/include/asm/page_no.h
> index 6bbe52025de3c5c6..8d0f862ee9d79532 100644
> --- a/arch/m68k/include/asm/page_no.h
> +++ b/arch/m68k/include/asm/page_no.h
> @@ -30,8 +30,8 @@ extern unsigned long memory_end;
>   #define page_to_pfn(page)	virt_to_pfn(page_to_virt(page))
>   #define pfn_valid(pfn)	        ((pfn) < max_mapnr)
>   
> -#define	virt_addr_valid(kaddr)	(((void *)(kaddr) >= (void *)PAGE_OFFSET) && \
> -				((void *)(kaddr) < (void *)memory_end))
> +#define	virt_addr_valid(kaddr)	(((unsigned long)(kaddr) >= PAGE_OFFSET) && \
> +				((unsigned long)(kaddr) < memory_end))
>   
>   #endif /* __ASSEMBLY__ */
>   
> 

Re: [PATCH] m68k: Fix virt_addr_valid() W=1 compiler warnings

[Geert Uytterhoeven]

On Tue, Feb 23, 2021 at 11:50 AM Geert Uytterhoeven
<geert@linux-m68k.org> wrote:
> If CONFIG_DEBUG_SG=y, and CONFIG_MMU=y:
>
>     include/linux/scatterlist.h: In function ‘sg_set_buf’:
>     arch/m68k/include/asm/page_mm.h:174:49: warning: ordered comparison of pointer with null pointer [-Wextra]
>       174 | #define virt_addr_valid(kaddr) ((void *)(kaddr) >= (void *)PAGE_OFFSET && (void *)(kaddr) < high_memory)
>           |                                                 ^~
>
> or CONFIG_MMU=n:
>
>     include/linux/scatterlist.h: In function ‘sg_set_buf’:
>     arch/m68k/include/asm/page_no.h:33:50: warning: ordered comparison of pointer with null pointer [-Wextra]
>        33 | #define virt_addr_valid(kaddr) (((void *)(kaddr) >= (void *)PAGE_OFFSET) && \
>           |                                                  ^~
>
> Fix this by doing the comparison in the "unsigned long" instead of the
> "void *" domain.
>
> Note that for now this is only seen when compiling btrfs, due to commit
> e9aa7c285d20a69c ("btrfs: enable W=1 checks for btrfs"), but as people
> are doing more W=1 compile testing, it will start to show up elsewhere,
> too.
>
> Signed-off-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>
> ---
> Probably we want this as a fix for v5.12, to avoid the build bots
> nagging about it all the time?
>
>  arch/m68k/include/asm/page_mm.h | 2 +-
>  arch/m68k/include/asm/page_no.h | 4 ++--
>  2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/m68k/include/asm/page_mm.h b/arch/m68k/include/asm/page_mm.h
> index 7f5912af2a52ea0a..9b1672f9b2e22cdf 100644
> --- a/arch/m68k/include/asm/page_mm.h
> +++ b/arch/m68k/include/asm/page_mm.h
> @@ -171,7 +171,7 @@ static inline __attribute_const__ int __virt_to_node_shift(void)
>  #include <asm-generic/memory_model.h>
>  #endif
>
> -#define virt_addr_valid(kaddr) ((void *)(kaddr) >= (void *)PAGE_OFFSET && (void *)(kaddr) < high_memory)
> +#define virt_addr_valid(kaddr) ((unsigned long)(kaddr) >= PAGE_OFFSET && ((unsigned long)kaddr) < (unsigned long)high_memory)

While preparing the pull request, I noticed I misplaced the braces in
the second part.
Will send a v2...

Gr{oetje,eeting}s,

                        Geert

-- 
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org

In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
                                -- Linus Torvalds