Re: [PATCH] Make PFN_PHYS return a properly-formed physical address
From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge
Date: Thu Aug 07 2008 - 20:17:32 EST
Andrew Morton wrote:
On Thu, 07 Aug 2008 16:45:12 -0700
Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
Shall we go with just using plain u64 (or unsigned long long if we want
a really consistent type) in the meantime, and then waffle about
introducing a new type everywhere?
Or we could redefine resource_size_t to be big enough to refer to any
resource, including all memory. It's close to being that anyway.
We could do
typedef resource_size_t jeremy_thing_t;
for now and worry about it later if the need arises, perhaps.
OK, I'll revise and repost.
Hm, curiously, the two arches which care most about this issue (x86 and
powerpc) already have phys_addr_t...
I guess we don't want CONFIG_ARCH_HAVE_PHYS_ADDR_T...
J
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/