From: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
To: benh@kernel.crashing.org
Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, sparclinux@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC/PATCH] [POWERPC] Make lmb support large physical addressing
Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2008 15:18:28 -0800 (PST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080213.151828.177835338.davem@davemloft.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1202943042.7296.48.camel@pasglop>
From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2008 09:50:42 +1100
>
> On Wed, 2008-02-13 at 16:43 -0600, Becky Bruce wrote:
> > Convert the lmb code to use phys_addr_t instead of unsigned long for
> > physical addresses and sizes. This is needed to support large amounts
> > of RAM on 32-bit systems that support 36-bit physical addressing.
> >
> > Built/booted on mpc8641; build tested on pasemi and 44x.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Becky Bruce <becky.bruce@freescale.com>
> > ---
> > Folks,
> >
> > This has been sitting in my tree for a few days, and now it looks like
> > David M. has submitted a patch that changes the lmb code to be shared
> > between sparc and powerpc. Sparc has no notion of a phys_addr_t.
> > Should we just use u64 everywhere in this code instead? Thoughts?
>
> An option would be to use resource_size_t, though it's a bit yucky...
>
> Dave, what do you prefer ?
u64 is fine with me, either way we'll be casting the printk()
arguments all over the place so the choice really isn't
so important one way or the other as far as I can tell.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-02-13 23:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-02-13 22:43 [RFC/PATCH] [POWERPC] Make lmb support large physical addressing Becky Bruce
2008-02-13 22:50 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2008-02-13 23:18 ` David Miller [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20080213.151828.177835338.davem@davemloft.net \
--to=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org \
--cc=sparclinux@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).