On Mon, 2009-08-24 at 21:48 +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
On Mon, Aug 24, 2009 at 11:17:14AM -0500, Becky Bruce wrote:
Previously, this was specified as a void *, but that's not
large enough on 32-bit systems with 36-bit physical
addressing support. Change the type to dma_addr_t so it
On Wed, 2009-08-26 at 22:29 +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
On Mon, 2009-08-24 at 21:48 +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
On Mon, Aug 24, 2009 at 11:17:14AM -0500, Becky Bruce wrote:
Previously, this was specified as a void *, but that's not
large enough on 32-bit systems with 36-bit
On Aug 26, 2009, at 9:08 AM, Michael Ellerman wrote:
On Wed, 2009-08-26 at 22:29 +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
On Mon, 2009-08-24 at 21:48 +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
On Mon, Aug 24, 2009 at 11:17:14AM -0500, Becky Bruce wrote:
Previously, this was specified as a void *, but
On Wed, 2009-08-26 at 15:20 -0500, Becky Bruce wrote:
On Aug 26, 2009, at 9:08 AM, Michael Ellerman wrote:
On Wed, 2009-08-26 at 22:29 +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
On Mon, 2009-08-24 at 21:48 +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
On Mon, Aug 24, 2009 at 11:17:14AM -0500, Becky Bruce
Previously, this was specified as a void *, but that's not
large enough on 32-bit systems with 36-bit physical
addressing support. Change the type to dma_addr_t so it
will scale based on the size of a dma address.
Signed-off-by: Becky Bruce bec...@kernel.crashing.org
---
On Mon, Aug 24, 2009 at 11:17:14AM -0500, Becky Bruce wrote:
Previously, this was specified as a void *, but that's not
large enough on 32-bit systems with 36-bit physical
addressing support. Change the type to dma_addr_t so it
will scale based on the size of a dma address.
This looks
