Re: [PATCH] 64bit resources start end value fix

Andrew Morton
2006-06-21T21:01:46Z

On Wed, 21 Jun 2006 13:44:15 -0700
Greg KH <gregkh@suse.de> wrote:

> > > Confused. This patch won't apply. It will apply with `patch -R', and if
> > > you do that you'll break iomem_reosurce.end by setting it to
> > > 0x00000000ffffffff.
> > >
> > > I don't think any additional changes are needed here.
> >
> > Andrew, you don't have to apply this patch. It is supposed to be picked
> > by Greg.
> >
> > There seems to be some confusion. Just few days back Greg consolidated
> > and re-organized all the 64bit resources patches and posted on LKML for
> > review.
> >
> > http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-kernel&m=115015916118671&w=2
> >
> > There were few review comments regarding kconfig options.
> > I reworked the patch and CONFING_RESOURCES_32BIT was changed to
> > CONFIG_RESOURCES_64BIT.
> >
> > http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-kernel&m=115072559700302&w=2
> >
> > Now Greg's tree and your tree are not exact replica when it comes to
> > 64bit resource patches. Hence this patch is supposed to be picked by
> > Greg to make sure things are not broken in his tree.
>
> It still breaks things as Andrew pointed out. .end should not be set to
> -1.

No, -1 is OK.

As it turns out,

unsigned long long x = ~0UL;

sets `x' to 0xffffffffffffffff which was totally not what I expected.

But -1 works, and the patch I have against your tree is OK.

Could someone please fix Andy Isaacson <adi@hexapodia.org>'s bug, btw?