linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] of: specify initrd location using 64-bit

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <505107DF.5020105@gmail.com>
Date:	Wed, 12 Sep 2012 17:08:31 -0500
From:	Rob Herring <robherring2@...il.com>
To:	Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>
CC:	Cyril Chemparathy <cyril@...com>, linux-mips@...ux-mips.org,
	x86@...nel.org, a-jacquiot@...com, mahesh@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
	linus.walleij@...aro.org, grant.likely@...retlab.ca,
	paul.gortmaker@...driver.com, paulus@...ba.org, hpa@...or.com,
	m.szyprowski@...sung.com, jonas@...thpole.se,
	linux@....linux.org.uk, linux-c6x-dev@...ux-c6x.org,
	nico@...aro.org, david.daney@...ium.com, mingo@...hat.com,
	Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
	benh@...nel.crashing.org, suzuki@...ibm.com, linux@...nrisc.net,
	arnd@...db.de, microblaze-uclinux@...e.uq.edu.au,
	devicetree-discuss@...ts.ozlabs.org, msalter@...hat.com,
	rob.herring@...xeda.com, tglx@...utronix.de,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, blogic@...nwrt.org,
	dhowells@...hat.com, monstr@...str.eu,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, ralf@...ux-mips.org, tj@...nel.org,
	linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] of: specify initrd location using 64-bit

On 09/12/2012 02:58 PM, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> On 09/12/2012 08:02 PM, Cyril Chemparathy wrote:
>>>> -void __init early_init_dt_setup_initrd_arch(unsigned long start,
>>>> unsigned long end)
>>>> +void __init early_init_dt_setup_initrd_arch(u64 start, u64 end)
>>>
>>> Why not phys_addr_t?
>>>
>>
>> The rest of the memory specific bits of the device-tree code use u64 for
>> addresses, and I kept it the same for consistency.
> 
> Geert is right here. If it is a physical address, it should be
> phys_addr_t.

While generally true, for the DT specific code I think it should be a
fixed u64. The size of the address is defined by the FDT, not the
kernel. It is very likely we could have a FDT that specifies addresses
in 64-bit values, but then we boot a kernel is compiled for !LPAE.
phys_addr_t is currently sized based on LPAE setting.

Also, this is how the memory and reserved nodes are handled currently,
so we should be consistent.

Rob

--
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/