From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Thu, 21 Nov 2002 19:46:16 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Thu, 21 Nov 2002 19:46:16 -0500 Received: from neon-gw-l3.transmeta.com ([63.209.4.196]:6158 "EHLO neon-gw.transmeta.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Thu, 21 Nov 2002 19:46:15 -0500 To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org From: "H. Peter Anvin" Subject: Re: [PATCH] export e820 table on x86 Date: 21 Nov 2002 16:53:04 -0800 Organization: Transmeta Corporation, Santa Clara CA Message-ID: References: <3DDD7067.6090500@us.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Disclaimer: Not speaking for Transmeta in any way, shape, or form. Copyright: Copyright 2002 H. Peter Anvin - All Rights Reserved Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Followup to: By author: Linus Torvalds In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel > > See also how we artificially only show 32-bit resources, because "struct > resource" uses "unsigned long". That's a design mistake, and it _should_ > be "u64" (this actually could cause problems already on 64-bit PCI on > 32-bit hosts, although it appears that nobody even tries to map devices > past the 4GB area anyway), but I've never had a test-case for fixing it > and seeing any difference. > Perhaps an abstract type, like resaddr_t, would make more sense? That way we'll have less of an issue when the next category of weird system architecture comes along, which may want some kind of node-based addressing, who knows... -hpa -- at work, in private! "Unix gives you enough rope to shoot yourself in the foot." http://www.zytor.com/~hpa/puzzle.txt