[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180704075449.GB458@jagdpanzerIV>
Date: Wed, 4 Jul 2018 16:54:49 +0900
From: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@...il.com>
To: Mike Rapoport <rppt@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-mm <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@...il.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm/memblock: replace u64 with phys_addr_t where
appropriate
On (07/04/18 10:03), Mike Rapoport wrote:
> arch/alpha/kernel/pci_iommu.c | 20 ++++++++++----------
> arch/arm/mm/alignment.c | 2 +-
> arch/arm/nwfpe/fpmodule.c | 2 +-
> arch/microblaze/mm/pgtable.c | 2 +-
> arch/sparc/kernel/ds.c | 2 +-
> arch/um/kernel/sysrq.c | 2 +-
> arch/x86/include/asm/trace/exceptions.h | 2 +-
> arch/x86/kernel/irq_64.c | 2 +-
> arch/x86/mm/extable.c | 4 ++--
> arch/x86/xen/multicalls.c | 2 +-
Isn't it "funny" that parisc, ia64, powerpc don't use pf/pF in arch code,
but x86, arm, etc. do use pf/pF in arch code?
Surely, I do understand why we have pf/pF in mm, drivers and all over the
place. But still, I'm surprised.
-ss
Powered by blists - more mailing lists