From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt Subject: Re: [PATCH] [SCSI] mpt fusion: Fix 32 bit platforms with 64 bit resources Date: Tue, 15 Sep 2009 20:29:38 +1000 Message-ID: <1253010578.8375.220.camel@pasglop> References: <1252455333-9925-1-git-send-email-pbathija@amcc.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from gate.crashing.org ([63.228.1.57]:41618 "EHLO gate.crashing.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752077AbZIOK3p (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 Sep 2009 06:29:45 -0400 In-Reply-To: <1252455333-9925-1-git-send-email-pbathija@amcc.com> Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org To: pbathija@amcc.com Cc: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org > diff --git a/drivers/message/fusion/mptbase.c b/drivers/message/fusion/mptbase.c > index 5d496a9..d5b0f15 100644 > --- a/drivers/message/fusion/mptbase.c > +++ b/drivers/message/fusion/mptbase.c > @@ -1510,11 +1510,12 @@ static int > mpt_mapresources(MPT_ADAPTER *ioc) > { > u8 __iomem *mem; > + u8 __iomem *port; > int ii; > - unsigned long mem_phys; > - unsigned long port; > - u32 msize; > - u32 psize; > + phys_addr_t mem_phys; > + phys_addr_t port_phys; > + resource_size_t msize; > + resource_size_t psize; Is phys_addr_t defined for all archs nowadays ? Why not use resource_size_t for everything ? resource_size_t is a bit of a misnomer, it's not a type supposed to reference a "size" but really a physical address (or a size)... it's been called resource_size_t I believe because it's "sized" appropriately for holding a physical address. Cheers, Ben.