Subject: Re: linux-next: build warning after merge of the swiotlb tree

From: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2021 22:43:16 -0400

On Wed, Jun 16, 2021 at 11:38:35AM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> After merging the swiotlb tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc
> ppc64_defconfig and x86_64 allmodconfig) produced this warning:
> 
> In file included from arch/powerpc/include/asm/bug.h:109,
>                  from include/linux/bug.h:5,
>                  from arch/powerpc/include/asm/mmu.h:147,
>                  from arch/powerpc/include/asm/lppaca.h:46,
>                  from arch/powerpc/include/asm/paca.h:17,
>                  from arch/powerpc/include/asm/current.h:13,
>                  from include/linux/sched.h:12,
>                  from include/linux/ratelimit.h:6,
>                  from include/linux/dev_printk.h:16,
>                  from include/linux/device.h:15,
>                  from include/linux/dma-mapping.h:7,
>                  from include/linux/dma-direct.h:9,
>                  from kernel/dma/swiotlb.c:24:
> kernel/dma/swiotlb.c: In function 'swiotlb_bounce':
> include/linux/dev_printk.h:242:23: warning: format '%lu' expects argument of type 'long unsigned int', but argument 4 has type 'unsigned int' [-Wformat=]
>   242 |  WARN_ONCE(condition, "%s %s: " format, \
>       |                       ^~~~~~~~~
> include/asm-generic/bug.h:97:17: note: in definition of macro '__WARN_printf'
>    97 |   __warn_printk(arg);     \
>       |                 ^~~
> include/asm-generic/bug.h:161:3: note: in expansion of macro 'WARN'
>   161 |   WARN(1, format);    \
>       |   ^~~~
> include/linux/dev_printk.h:242:2: note: in expansion of macro 'WARN_ONCE'
>   242 |  WARN_ONCE(condition, "%s %s: " format, \
>       |  ^~~~~~~~~
> kernel/dma/swiotlb.c:355:3: note: in expansion of macro 'dev_WARN_ONCE'
>   355 |   dev_WARN_ONCE(dev, 1,
>       |   ^~~~~~~~~~~~~
> 
> Introduced by commit
> 
>   17eb5dcf1f15 ("swiotlb: manipulate orig_addr when tlb_addr has offset")

Fixed it up and should be OK in the next run. Thanks!
> -- 
> Cheers,
> Stephen Rothwell