From: Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2006 14:13:05 -0800
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Eric W. Biederman) wrote: > > > > Benjamin LaHaise <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > > On Wed, Mar 15, 2006 at 02:29:32PM -0700, Eric W. Biederman wrote: > > >> If the impact is very slight or unmeasurable this means the option > > >> needs to fall under CONFIG_EMBEDDED, where you can change if > > >> every last bit of RAM counts but otherwise you won't care. > > > > > > But we have a data type that is correct for this usage: dma_addr_t. > > > > Well the name is wrong. Because these are in general not DMA addresses, > > but it may have the other desired properties. So it may be > > useable. > > Yes, dma_addr_t does the right thing but has the wrong name. No it doesn't. It's 32-bit on Sparc64 because all DMA mappings go through the IOMMU into a 32-bit window on PCI space. But we do most certainly want to support full 64-bit BARs in PCI devices on sparc64.
_______________________________________________ fastboot mailing list [email protected] https://lists.osdl.org/mailman/listinfo/fastboot
