From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933248AbYBMWvY (ORCPT ); Wed, 13 Feb 2008 17:51:24 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1755750AbYBMWvM (ORCPT ); Wed, 13 Feb 2008 17:51:12 -0500 Received: from gate.crashing.org ([63.228.1.57]:39833 "EHLO gate.crashing.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752596AbYBMWvL (ORCPT ); Wed, 13 Feb 2008 17:51:11 -0500 Subject: Re: [RFC/PATCH] [POWERPC] Make lmb support large physical addressing From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt Reply-To: benh@kernel.crashing.org To: Becky Bruce Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, sparclinux@vger.kernel.org, davem@davemloft.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2008 09:50:42 +1100 Message-Id: <1202943042.7296.48.camel@pasglop> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.12.1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org 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 > --- > 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 ? Ben.