[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAOesGMj8NSgSEz0H2gzgMsk_fi-kx=qM+=4qy4b6-vSsHkVfoA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2013 10:45:11 -0700
From: Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>
To: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>
Cc: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>,
Vinod Koul <vinod.koul@...el.com>,
Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
Shawn Guo <shawn.guo@...aro.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] dma: use %pa to print dma_addr_t
On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 10:35 AM, Russell King - ARM Linux
<linux@....linux.org.uk> wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 10:11:44AM -0700, Olof Johansson wrote:
>> Any >32bit-addressable machine will likely want 64-bit dma_addr_t as
>> well. The only architecture that doesn't seem to set
>> ARCH_DMA_ADDR_T_64BIT based on PHYS_ADDR_T size is ARM, and I think
>> that should just be changed there as well.
The thread Joe linked to refers to a comment that is now deleted;
sparc64 apparantly has 32-bit dma_addr_t at least, so there are
platforms where the two differ permanently. Adding a new printk format
is probably needed here after all.
> Do we actually have any 64-bit DMA controllers out there? As far as
> I'm aware, all our DMA controllers are all 32-bit address only. That
> makes a 64-bit dma_addr_t rather silly.
PCI/PCI-e is the large unknown here, I'm not actually sure if any of
the current implementation of host controllers support it, but it
would seem likely that server-class hardware does.
-Olof
--
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