[PATCH] i386,amd64: mmconfig __iomem annotations
From: Al Viro
Date: Thu Dec 15 2005 - 04:26:58 EST
Signed-off-by: Al Viro <viro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
arch/i386/pci/mmconfig.c | 2 +-
arch/x86_64/pci/mmconfig.c | 14 +++++++-------
2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
2e9fa139a1fc14c8cb26fae0bcb31ecc73811f6f
diff --git a/arch/i386/pci/mmconfig.c b/arch/i386/pci/mmconfig.c
index 08a0849..70a9cc1 100644
--- a/arch/i386/pci/mmconfig.c
+++ b/arch/i386/pci/mmconfig.c
@@ -155,7 +155,7 @@ static __init void unreachable_devices(v
addr = get_base_addr(0, 0, PCI_DEVFN(i, 0));
if (addr != 0)
pci_exp_set_dev_base(addr, 0, PCI_DEVFN(i, 0));
- if (addr == 0 || readl((u32 *)addr) != val1)
+ if (addr == 0 || readl((u32 __iomem *)addr) != val1)
set_bit(i, fallback_slots);
spin_unlock_irqrestore(&pci_config_lock, flags);
}
diff --git a/arch/x86_64/pci/mmconfig.c b/arch/x86_64/pci/mmconfig.c
index 9c4f907..f16c0d5 100644
--- a/arch/x86_64/pci/mmconfig.c
+++ b/arch/x86_64/pci/mmconfig.c
@@ -18,11 +18,11 @@ static DECLARE_BITMAP(fallback_slots, 32
/* Static virtual mapping of the MMCONFIG aperture */
struct mmcfg_virt {
struct acpi_table_mcfg_config *cfg;
- char *virt;
+ char __iomem *virt;
};
static struct mmcfg_virt *pci_mmcfg_virt;
-static char *get_virt(unsigned int seg, unsigned bus)
+static char __iomem *get_virt(unsigned int seg, unsigned bus)
{
int cfg_num = -1;
struct acpi_table_mcfg_config *cfg;
@@ -43,9 +43,9 @@ static char *get_virt(unsigned int seg,
}
}
-static char *pci_dev_base(unsigned int seg, unsigned int bus, unsigned int devfn)
+static char __iomem *pci_dev_base(unsigned int seg, unsigned int bus, unsigned int devfn)
{
- char *addr;
+ char __iomem *addr;
if (seg == 0 && bus == 0 && test_bit(PCI_SLOT(devfn), &fallback_slots))
return NULL;
addr = get_virt(seg, bus);
@@ -57,7 +57,7 @@ static char *pci_dev_base(unsigned int s
static int pci_mmcfg_read(unsigned int seg, unsigned int bus,
unsigned int devfn, int reg, int len, u32 *value)
{
- char *addr;
+ char __iomem *addr;
/* Why do we have this when nobody checks it. How about a BUG()!? -AK */
if (unlikely(!value || (bus > 255) || (devfn > 255) || (reg > 4095)))
@@ -85,7 +85,7 @@ static int pci_mmcfg_read(unsigned int s
static int pci_mmcfg_write(unsigned int seg, unsigned int bus,
unsigned int devfn, int reg, int len, u32 value)
{
- char *addr;
+ char __iomem *addr;
/* Why do we have this when nobody checks it. How about a BUG()!? -AK */
if (unlikely((bus > 255) || (devfn > 255) || (reg > 4095)))
@@ -127,7 +127,7 @@ static __init void unreachable_devices(v
int i;
for (i = 0; i < 32; i++) {
u32 val1;
- char *addr;
+ char __iomem *addr;
pci_conf1_read(0, 0, PCI_DEVFN(i,0), 0, 4, &val1);
if (val1 == 0xffffffff)
--
0.99.9.GIT
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/