On Wed, Mar 15, 2006 at 01:13:56PM -0700, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> Kumar Gala <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > On Mar 15, 2006, at 1:57 PM, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>> One of the possible solutions to this problem is that expand the size
> >>> of "start" and "end" to "unsigned long long". But whole of the PCI and
> >>> driver code has been written assuming start and end to be unsigned long
> >>> and compiler starts throwing warnings.
> >>
> >>
> >> please use dma_addr_t then instead of unsigned long long
> >>
> >> this is the right size on all platforms afaik (could a ppc64 person
> >> verify this?> ;)
> >
> > Actually we really just want "start" and "end" to be u64 on all platforms.
> > Linus was ok with this change but no one has gone through and fixed
> > everything
> > that would be required for it.
>
> Since it is faster to ask :)
>
> How is it that other pieces of code have problems?
> Warnings or something nasty?
Few problems which I have noticed so far.
- Many printk() warnings. Wherever start and end are being printed,
the format specifier being used is %lx. Needs to be changed to %Lx.
- Some folks save a pointer of type (unsigned long *) to start and end field
and then try to operate on it. This pointer type shall have to be changed
to something like u64*.
unsigned long *port, *end, *tport, *tend;
port = &dev->res.port_resource[idx].start;
- Some folks cast "start" to a pointer and then use it. Compiler gives warning.
addr_reg = (void __iomem *) addr->start;
-vivek
_______________________________________________
fastboot mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.osdl.org/mailman/listinfo/fastboot
