[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Thu, 07 Aug 2008 17:16:50 -0700
From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
CC: ehabkost@...hat.com, x86@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Make PFN_PHYS return a properly-formed physical address
Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Thu, 07 Aug 2008 16:45:12 -0700
> Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org> 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@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists