| Message ID | 20250212174333.371681-2-gustavo.sousa@intel.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
| Series | Improve type-safety on POWER_DOMAIN_*() macros | expand |
On Wed, Feb 12, 2025 at 02:43:16PM -0300, Gustavo Sousa wrote: > Let the compiler know that we are intetionally using a different enum > type to perform arithmetic with enum intel_display_power_domain in the > POWER_DOMAIN_*(). Do that by explicitly casting the macro argument to > int. > > Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com> > Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202502120809.XfmcqkBD-lkp@intel.com/ > Signed-off-by: Gustavo Sousa <gustavo.sousa@intel.com> > --- > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display_power.h | 6 +++--- > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display_power.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display_power.h > index a3a5c1be8bab..3caa3f517a32 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display_power.h > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display_power.h > @@ -117,12 +117,12 @@ enum intel_display_power_domain { > POWER_DOMAIN_INVALID = POWER_DOMAIN_NUM, > }; > > -#define POWER_DOMAIN_PIPE(pipe) ((pipe) + POWER_DOMAIN_PIPE_A) > +#define POWER_DOMAIN_PIPE(pipe) ((int)(pipe) + POWER_DOMAIN_PIPE_A) > #define POWER_DOMAIN_PIPE_PANEL_FITTER(pipe) \ > - ((pipe) + POWER_DOMAIN_PIPE_PANEL_FITTER_A) > + ((int)(pipe) + POWER_DOMAIN_PIPE_PANEL_FITTER_A) > #define POWER_DOMAIN_TRANSCODER(tran) \ > ((tran) == TRANSCODER_EDP ? POWER_DOMAIN_TRANSCODER_EDP : \ > - (tran) + POWER_DOMAIN_TRANSCODER_A) > + (int)(tran) + POWER_DOMAIN_TRANSCODER_A) I've generally gone for the POWER_DOMAIN_TRANSCODER_A + (tran) - TRANSCODER_A form for such things, to also make sure it works even if TRANSCODER_A isn't 0 anymore. Does that avoid the warning as well? Maybe these should even be functions rather than macros? > > struct intel_power_domain_mask { > DECLARE_BITMAP(bits, POWER_DOMAIN_NUM); > -- > 2.48.1
Quoting Ville Syrjälä (2025-02-12 14:52:19-03:00) >On Wed, Feb 12, 2025 at 02:43:16PM -0300, Gustavo Sousa wrote: >> Let the compiler know that we are intetionally using a different enum >> type to perform arithmetic with enum intel_display_power_domain in the >> POWER_DOMAIN_*(). Do that by explicitly casting the macro argument to >> int. >> >> Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com> >> Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202502120809.XfmcqkBD-lkp@intel.com/ >> Signed-off-by: Gustavo Sousa <gustavo.sousa@intel.com> >> --- >> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display_power.h | 6 +++--- >> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display_power.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display_power.h >> index a3a5c1be8bab..3caa3f517a32 100644 >> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display_power.h >> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display_power.h >> @@ -117,12 +117,12 @@ enum intel_display_power_domain { >> POWER_DOMAIN_INVALID = POWER_DOMAIN_NUM, >> }; >> >> -#define POWER_DOMAIN_PIPE(pipe) ((pipe) + POWER_DOMAIN_PIPE_A) >> +#define POWER_DOMAIN_PIPE(pipe) ((int)(pipe) + POWER_DOMAIN_PIPE_A) >> #define POWER_DOMAIN_PIPE_PANEL_FITTER(pipe) \ >> - ((pipe) + POWER_DOMAIN_PIPE_PANEL_FITTER_A) >> + ((int)(pipe) + POWER_DOMAIN_PIPE_PANEL_FITTER_A) >> #define POWER_DOMAIN_TRANSCODER(tran) \ >> ((tran) == TRANSCODER_EDP ? POWER_DOMAIN_TRANSCODER_EDP : \ >> - (tran) + POWER_DOMAIN_TRANSCODER_A) >> + (int)(tran) + POWER_DOMAIN_TRANSCODER_A) > >I've generally gone for the >POWER_DOMAIN_TRANSCODER_A + (tran) - TRANSCODER_A >form for such things, to also make sure it works >even if TRANSCODER_A isn't 0 anymore. >Does that avoid the warning as well? Hm... That's a good idea; and I think it might avoid the warning indeed (maybe we would need parentheses around (tran) - TRANSCODER_A). > >Maybe these should even be functions rather than macros? Yeah. I actually considered this possibility, but went with the macros to keep the change simple. If that's welcome, I could go ahead with turning those macros into static inline functions. -- Gustavo Sousa > >> >> struct intel_power_domain_mask { >> DECLARE_BITMAP(bits, POWER_DOMAIN_NUM); >> -- >> 2.48.1 > >-- >Ville Syrjälä >Intel
Quoting Gustavo Sousa (2025-02-12 14:59:28-03:00) >Quoting Ville Syrjälä (2025-02-12 14:52:19-03:00) >>On Wed, Feb 12, 2025 at 02:43:16PM -0300, Gustavo Sousa wrote: >>> Let the compiler know that we are intetionally using a different enum >>> type to perform arithmetic with enum intel_display_power_domain in the >>> POWER_DOMAIN_*(). Do that by explicitly casting the macro argument to >>> int. >>> >>> Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com> >>> Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202502120809.XfmcqkBD-lkp@intel.com/ >>> Signed-off-by: Gustavo Sousa <gustavo.sousa@intel.com> >>> --- >>> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display_power.h | 6 +++--- >>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display_power.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display_power.h >>> index a3a5c1be8bab..3caa3f517a32 100644 >>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display_power.h >>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display_power.h >>> @@ -117,12 +117,12 @@ enum intel_display_power_domain { >>> POWER_DOMAIN_INVALID = POWER_DOMAIN_NUM, >>> }; >>> >>> -#define POWER_DOMAIN_PIPE(pipe) ((pipe) + POWER_DOMAIN_PIPE_A) >>> +#define POWER_DOMAIN_PIPE(pipe) ((int)(pipe) + POWER_DOMAIN_PIPE_A) >>> #define POWER_DOMAIN_PIPE_PANEL_FITTER(pipe) \ >>> - ((pipe) + POWER_DOMAIN_PIPE_PANEL_FITTER_A) >>> + ((int)(pipe) + POWER_DOMAIN_PIPE_PANEL_FITTER_A) >>> #define POWER_DOMAIN_TRANSCODER(tran) \ >>> ((tran) == TRANSCODER_EDP ? POWER_DOMAIN_TRANSCODER_EDP : \ >>> - (tran) + POWER_DOMAIN_TRANSCODER_A) >>> + (int)(tran) + POWER_DOMAIN_TRANSCODER_A) >> >>I've generally gone for the >>POWER_DOMAIN_TRANSCODER_A + (tran) - TRANSCODER_A >>form for such things, to also make sure it works >>even if TRANSCODER_A isn't 0 anymore. >>Does that avoid the warning as well? > >Hm... That's a good idea; and I think it might avoid the warning indeed >(maybe we would need parentheses around (tran) - TRANSCODER_A). I did a quick test and this also took care of removing the clang warning in my environment: diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display_power.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display_power.h index e354051e8982..d46b35dbe018 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display_power.h +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display_power.h @@ -123,7 +123,7 @@ enum intel_display_power_domain { ((enum intel_display_power_domain)((int)(pipe) + POWER_DOMAIN_PIPE_PANEL_FITTER_A)) #define POWER_DOMAIN_TRANSCODER(tran) \ ((tran) == TRANSCODER_EDP ? POWER_DOMAIN_TRANSCODER_EDP : \ - (enum intel_display_power_domain)((int)(tran) + POWER_DOMAIN_TRANSCODER_A)) + (enum intel_display_power_domain)(POWER_DOMAIN_TRANSCODER_A + ((tran) - TRANSCODER_A))) struct intel_power_domain_mask { DECLARE_BITMAP(bits, POWER_DOMAIN_NUM); The parentheses around (tran) - TRANSCODER_A were indeed necessary, probably for the compiler to see that as an int expression. We can get rid of the parentheses if we do (tran) - TRANSCODER_A before adding POWER_DOMAIN_TRANSCODER_A: diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display_power.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display_power.h index e354051e8982..b15eb4fd5062 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display_power.h +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display_power.h @@ -123,7 +123,7 @@ enum intel_display_power_domain { ((enum intel_display_power_domain)((int)(pipe) + POWER_DOMAIN_PIPE_PANEL_FITTER_A)) #define POWER_DOMAIN_TRANSCODER(tran) \ ((tran) == TRANSCODER_EDP ? POWER_DOMAIN_TRANSCODER_EDP : \ - (enum intel_display_power_domain)((int)(tran) + POWER_DOMAIN_TRANSCODER_A)) + (enum intel_display_power_domain)((tran) - TRANSCODER_A + POWER_DOMAIN_TRANSCODER_A)) struct intel_power_domain_mask { DECLARE_BITMAP(bits, POWER_DOMAIN_NUM); I'm tending more toward the second alternative. -- Gustavo Sousa > >> >>Maybe these should even be functions rather than macros? > >Yeah. I actually considered this possibility, but went with the macros >to keep the change simple. > >If that's welcome, I could go ahead with turning those macros into >static inline functions. > >-- >Gustavo Sousa > >> >>> >>> struct intel_power_domain_mask { >>> DECLARE_BITMAP(bits, POWER_DOMAIN_NUM); >>> -- >>> 2.48.1 >> >>-- >>Ville Syrjälä >>Intel
On Wed, Feb 12, 2025 at 03:44:26PM -0300, Gustavo Sousa wrote: > Quoting Gustavo Sousa (2025-02-12 14:59:28-03:00) > >Quoting Ville Syrjälä (2025-02-12 14:52:19-03:00) > >>On Wed, Feb 12, 2025 at 02:43:16PM -0300, Gustavo Sousa wrote: > >>> Let the compiler know that we are intetionally using a different enum > >>> type to perform arithmetic with enum intel_display_power_domain in the > >>> POWER_DOMAIN_*(). Do that by explicitly casting the macro argument to > >>> int. > >>> > >>> Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com> > >>> Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202502120809.XfmcqkBD-lkp@intel.com/ > >>> Signed-off-by: Gustavo Sousa <gustavo.sousa@intel.com> > >>> --- > >>> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display_power.h | 6 +++--- > >>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > >>> > >>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display_power.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display_power.h > >>> index a3a5c1be8bab..3caa3f517a32 100644 > >>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display_power.h > >>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display_power.h > >>> @@ -117,12 +117,12 @@ enum intel_display_power_domain { > >>> POWER_DOMAIN_INVALID = POWER_DOMAIN_NUM, > >>> }; > >>> > >>> -#define POWER_DOMAIN_PIPE(pipe) ((pipe) + POWER_DOMAIN_PIPE_A) > >>> +#define POWER_DOMAIN_PIPE(pipe) ((int)(pipe) + POWER_DOMAIN_PIPE_A) > >>> #define POWER_DOMAIN_PIPE_PANEL_FITTER(pipe) \ > >>> - ((pipe) + POWER_DOMAIN_PIPE_PANEL_FITTER_A) > >>> + ((int)(pipe) + POWER_DOMAIN_PIPE_PANEL_FITTER_A) > >>> #define POWER_DOMAIN_TRANSCODER(tran) \ > >>> ((tran) == TRANSCODER_EDP ? POWER_DOMAIN_TRANSCODER_EDP : \ > >>> - (tran) + POWER_DOMAIN_TRANSCODER_A) > >>> + (int)(tran) + POWER_DOMAIN_TRANSCODER_A) > >> > >>I've generally gone for the > >>POWER_DOMAIN_TRANSCODER_A + (tran) - TRANSCODER_A > >>form for such things, to also make sure it works > >>even if TRANSCODER_A isn't 0 anymore. > >>Does that avoid the warning as well? > > > >Hm... That's a good idea; and I think it might avoid the warning indeed > >(maybe we would need parentheses around (tran) - TRANSCODER_A). > > I did a quick test and this also took care of removing the clang warning > in my environment: > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display_power.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display_power.h > index e354051e8982..d46b35dbe018 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display_power.h > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display_power.h > @@ -123,7 +123,7 @@ enum intel_display_power_domain { > ((enum intel_display_power_domain)((int)(pipe) + POWER_DOMAIN_PIPE_PANEL_FITTER_A)) > #define POWER_DOMAIN_TRANSCODER(tran) \ > ((tran) == TRANSCODER_EDP ? POWER_DOMAIN_TRANSCODER_EDP : \ > - (enum intel_display_power_domain)((int)(tran) + POWER_DOMAIN_TRANSCODER_A)) > + (enum intel_display_power_domain)(POWER_DOMAIN_TRANSCODER_A + ((tran) - TRANSCODER_A))) > > struct intel_power_domain_mask { > DECLARE_BITMAP(bits, POWER_DOMAIN_NUM); > > The parentheses around (tran) - TRANSCODER_A were indeed necessary, > probably for the compiler to see that as an int expression. > > We can get rid of the parentheses if we do (tran) - TRANSCODER_A before > adding POWER_DOMAIN_TRANSCODER_A: > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display_power.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display_power.h > index e354051e8982..b15eb4fd5062 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display_power.h > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display_power.h > @@ -123,7 +123,7 @@ enum intel_display_power_domain { > ((enum intel_display_power_domain)((int)(pipe) + POWER_DOMAIN_PIPE_PANEL_FITTER_A)) > #define POWER_DOMAIN_TRANSCODER(tran) \ > ((tran) == TRANSCODER_EDP ? POWER_DOMAIN_TRANSCODER_EDP : \ > - (enum intel_display_power_domain)((int)(tran) + POWER_DOMAIN_TRANSCODER_A)) > + (enum intel_display_power_domain)((tran) - TRANSCODER_A + POWER_DOMAIN_TRANSCODER_A)) Looks reasoanble enough to me. Do we still need the final cast? > > struct intel_power_domain_mask { > DECLARE_BITMAP(bits, POWER_DOMAIN_NUM); > > I'm tending more toward the second alternative. > > -- > Gustavo Sousa > > > > >> > >>Maybe these should even be functions rather than macros? > > > >Yeah. I actually considered this possibility, but went with the macros > >to keep the change simple. > > > >If that's welcome, I could go ahead with turning those macros into > >static inline functions. > > > >-- > >Gustavo Sousa > > > >> > >>> > >>> struct intel_power_domain_mask { > >>> DECLARE_BITMAP(bits, POWER_DOMAIN_NUM); > >>> -- > >>> 2.48.1 > >> > >>-- > >>Ville Syrjälä > >>Intel
Quoting Ville Syrjälä (2025-02-12 15:55:59-03:00) >On Wed, Feb 12, 2025 at 03:44:26PM -0300, Gustavo Sousa wrote: >> Quoting Gustavo Sousa (2025-02-12 14:59:28-03:00) >> >Quoting Ville Syrjälä (2025-02-12 14:52:19-03:00) >> >>On Wed, Feb 12, 2025 at 02:43:16PM -0300, Gustavo Sousa wrote: >> >>> Let the compiler know that we are intetionally using a different enum >> >>> type to perform arithmetic with enum intel_display_power_domain in the >> >>> POWER_DOMAIN_*(). Do that by explicitly casting the macro argument to >> >>> int. >> >>> >> >>> Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com> >> >>> Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202502120809.XfmcqkBD-lkp@intel.com/ >> >>> Signed-off-by: Gustavo Sousa <gustavo.sousa@intel.com> >> >>> --- >> >>> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display_power.h | 6 +++--- >> >>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) >> >>> >> >>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display_power.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display_power.h >> >>> index a3a5c1be8bab..3caa3f517a32 100644 >> >>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display_power.h >> >>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display_power.h >> >>> @@ -117,12 +117,12 @@ enum intel_display_power_domain { >> >>> POWER_DOMAIN_INVALID = POWER_DOMAIN_NUM, >> >>> }; >> >>> >> >>> -#define POWER_DOMAIN_PIPE(pipe) ((pipe) + POWER_DOMAIN_PIPE_A) >> >>> +#define POWER_DOMAIN_PIPE(pipe) ((int)(pipe) + POWER_DOMAIN_PIPE_A) >> >>> #define POWER_DOMAIN_PIPE_PANEL_FITTER(pipe) \ >> >>> - ((pipe) + POWER_DOMAIN_PIPE_PANEL_FITTER_A) >> >>> + ((int)(pipe) + POWER_DOMAIN_PIPE_PANEL_FITTER_A) >> >>> #define POWER_DOMAIN_TRANSCODER(tran) \ >> >>> ((tran) == TRANSCODER_EDP ? POWER_DOMAIN_TRANSCODER_EDP : \ >> >>> - (tran) + POWER_DOMAIN_TRANSCODER_A) >> >>> + (int)(tran) + POWER_DOMAIN_TRANSCODER_A) >> >> >> >>I've generally gone for the >> >>POWER_DOMAIN_TRANSCODER_A + (tran) - TRANSCODER_A >> >>form for such things, to also make sure it works >> >>even if TRANSCODER_A isn't 0 anymore. >> >>Does that avoid the warning as well? >> > >> >Hm... That's a good idea; and I think it might avoid the warning indeed >> >(maybe we would need parentheses around (tran) - TRANSCODER_A). >> >> I did a quick test and this also took care of removing the clang warning >> in my environment: >> >> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display_power.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display_power.h >> index e354051e8982..d46b35dbe018 100644 >> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display_power.h >> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display_power.h >> @@ -123,7 +123,7 @@ enum intel_display_power_domain { >> ((enum intel_display_power_domain)((int)(pipe) + POWER_DOMAIN_PIPE_PANEL_FITTER_A)) >> #define POWER_DOMAIN_TRANSCODER(tran) \ >> ((tran) == TRANSCODER_EDP ? POWER_DOMAIN_TRANSCODER_EDP : \ >> - (enum intel_display_power_domain)((int)(tran) + POWER_DOMAIN_TRANSCODER_A)) >> + (enum intel_display_power_domain)(POWER_DOMAIN_TRANSCODER_A + ((tran) - TRANSCODER_A))) >> >> struct intel_power_domain_mask { >> DECLARE_BITMAP(bits, POWER_DOMAIN_NUM); >> >> The parentheses around (tran) - TRANSCODER_A were indeed necessary, >> probably for the compiler to see that as an int expression. >> >> We can get rid of the parentheses if we do (tran) - TRANSCODER_A before >> adding POWER_DOMAIN_TRANSCODER_A: >> >> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display_power.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display_power.h >> index e354051e8982..b15eb4fd5062 100644 >> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display_power.h >> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display_power.h >> @@ -123,7 +123,7 @@ enum intel_display_power_domain { >> ((enum intel_display_power_domain)((int)(pipe) + POWER_DOMAIN_PIPE_PANEL_FITTER_A)) >> #define POWER_DOMAIN_TRANSCODER(tran) \ >> ((tran) == TRANSCODER_EDP ? POWER_DOMAIN_TRANSCODER_EDP : \ >> - (enum intel_display_power_domain)((int)(tran) + POWER_DOMAIN_TRANSCODER_A)) >> + (enum intel_display_power_domain)((tran) - TRANSCODER_A + POWER_DOMAIN_TRANSCODER_A)) > >Looks reasoanble enough to me. Do we still need the final cast? The final cast is just an extra thing (actually done in patch #2) to have the result of the macro to be seen as an enum intel_display_power_domain from the outside. Nothing really required, just something to make its usage a bit more type safe. If we went with implementing those macros as functions, their return type as enum intel_display_power_domain would basically have the same effect, I think. -- Gustavo Sousa > >> >> struct intel_power_domain_mask { >> DECLARE_BITMAP(bits, POWER_DOMAIN_NUM); >> >> I'm tending more toward the second alternative. >> >> -- >> Gustavo Sousa >> >> > >> >> >> >>Maybe these should even be functions rather than macros? >> > >> >Yeah. I actually considered this possibility, but went with the macros >> >to keep the change simple. >> > >> >If that's welcome, I could go ahead with turning those macros into >> >static inline functions. >> > >> >-- >> >Gustavo Sousa >> > >> >> >> >>> >> >>> struct intel_power_domain_mask { >> >>> DECLARE_BITMAP(bits, POWER_DOMAIN_NUM); >> >>> -- >> >>> 2.48.1 >> >> >> >>-- >> >>Ville Syrjälä >> >>Intel > >-- >Ville Syrjälä >Intel
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display_power.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display_power.h index a3a5c1be8bab..3caa3f517a32 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display_power.h +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display_power.h @@ -117,12 +117,12 @@ enum intel_display_power_domain { POWER_DOMAIN_INVALID = POWER_DOMAIN_NUM, }; -#define POWER_DOMAIN_PIPE(pipe) ((pipe) + POWER_DOMAIN_PIPE_A) +#define POWER_DOMAIN_PIPE(pipe) ((int)(pipe) + POWER_DOMAIN_PIPE_A) #define POWER_DOMAIN_PIPE_PANEL_FITTER(pipe) \ - ((pipe) + POWER_DOMAIN_PIPE_PANEL_FITTER_A) + ((int)(pipe) + POWER_DOMAIN_PIPE_PANEL_FITTER_A) #define POWER_DOMAIN_TRANSCODER(tran) \ ((tran) == TRANSCODER_EDP ? POWER_DOMAIN_TRANSCODER_EDP : \ - (tran) + POWER_DOMAIN_TRANSCODER_A) + (int)(tran) + POWER_DOMAIN_TRANSCODER_A) struct intel_power_domain_mask { DECLARE_BITMAP(bits, POWER_DOMAIN_NUM);
Let the compiler know that we are intetionally using a different enum type to perform arithmetic with enum intel_display_power_domain in the POWER_DOMAIN_*(). Do that by explicitly casting the macro argument to int. Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com> Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202502120809.XfmcqkBD-lkp@intel.com/ Signed-off-by: Gustavo Sousa <gustavo.sousa@intel.com> --- drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display_power.h | 6 +++--- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)