[PATCH] drm/i915: Explicitly cast divisor to fix Coccinelle warning

[Ville Syrjälä]

On Wed, Jul 10, 2024 at 01:55:32PM +0200, Thorsten Blum wrote:
> On 10. Jul 2024, at 13:38, Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala at linux.intel.com> wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 10, 2024 at 09:46:51AM +0200, Thorsten Blum wrote:
> >> As the comment explains, the if check ensures that the divisor oa_period
> >> is a u32. Explicitly cast oa_period to u32 to remove the following
> >> Coccinelle/coccicheck warning reported by do_div.cocci:
> >> 
> >>  WARNING: do_div() does a 64-by-32 division, please consider using div64_u64 instead
> >> 
> >> Signed-off-by: Thorsten Blum <thorsten.blum at toblux.com>
> >> ---
> >> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_perf.c | 2 +-
> >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >> 
> >> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_perf.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_perf.c
> >> index 0b1cd4c7a525..24722e758aaf 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_perf.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_perf.c
> >> @@ -4103,7 +4103,7 @@ static int read_properties_unlocked(struct i915_perf *perf,
> >>  */
> >> if (oa_period <= NSEC_PER_SEC) {
> >> u64 tmp = NSEC_PER_SEC;
> >> - do_div(tmp, oa_period);
> >> + do_div(tmp, (u32)oa_period);
> > 
> > Why is this code even using do_div() when it doesn't need the
> > remainder?
> 
> do_div() is an optimized 64-by-32 division and the compiler should
> automatically remove the remainder if it's not used.

The point is that do_div() is a bad API because it magically
changes the divided in place. There are more sensible 64bit
division helpers in math64.h that can be used instead.

oa_exponent_to_ns() also hand rolls a DIV_ROUND_UP_ULL()
for some reason...

-- 
Ville Syrjälä
Intel