[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20100828.154125.246523501.davem@davemloft.net>
Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2010 15:41:25 -0700 (PDT)
From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To: akinobu.mita@...il.com
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, ionut@...ula.org,
fujita.tomonori@....ntt.co.jp
Subject: Re: [PATCH] starfire: use BUILD_BUG_ON for netdrv_addr_t
From: Akinobu Mita <akinobu.mita@...il.com>
Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2010 14:08:45 +0900
> Detect size mismatch for netdrv_addr_t at build time rather than
> checking at module load time.
>
> Signed-off-by: Akinobu Mita <akinobu.mita@...il.com>
> Cc: Ion Badulescu <ionut@...ula.org>
> Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>
> Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org
Applied, but I suspect we will see some interesting build failures now
if that ugly and brittle ifdef test which constrols the netdrv_addr_t
define isn't %100 accurate.
Fujita-san, what this driver does is actually pretty reasonable. It
has two kinds of descriptors, one supports 32-bit addresses and the
other supports 64-bit addresses. It wants to CPP test which one to
use so that the driver is not burdoned with two duplicated sets of
routines.
Maybe we should provide a DMA_ADDR_T_SIZE or similar macro? What do
you think? Anything is better than what it uses now:
/*
* This SUCKS.
* We need a much better method to determine if dma_addr_t is 64-bit.
*/
#if (defined(__i386__) && defined(CONFIG_HIGHMEM64G)) || defined(__x86_64__) || defined (__ia64__) || defined(__alpha__) || defined(__mips64__) || (defined(__mips__) && defined(CONFIG_HIGHMEM) && defined(CONFIG_64BIT_PHYS_ADDR))
:-)
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists