Message-ID: <1432031917.15181.20.camel@pengutronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/9] misc: sram: use phys_addr_t instead of u32 for
 physical address
From: Philipp Zabel <p.zabel@pengutronix.de>
To: Vladimir Zapolskiy <vladimir_zapolskiy@mentor.com>
Cc: Heiko =?ISO-8859-1?Q?St=FCbner?= <heiko@sntech.de>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Date: Tue, 19 May 2015 12:38:37 +0200
In-Reply-To: <1431976122-4228-4-git-send-email-vladimir_zapolskiy@mentor.com>
References: <1431976122-4228-1-git-send-email-vladimir_zapolskiy@mentor.com>
	 <1431976122-4228-4-git-send-email-vladimir_zapolskiy@mentor.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 3790
Lines: 114

Hi Vladimir,

Am Montag, den 18.05.2015, 22:08 +0300 schrieb Vladimir Zapolskiy:
> To avoid any problems on non 32-bit platforms get and store memory
> addresses under phys_addr_t type.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Vladimir Zapolskiy <vladimir_zapolskiy@mentor.com>
> ---
> Changes from v1 to v2:
> - report size of SRAM in decimal format '%zu' instead of '%zx'
> - replacement of denominator '1024' to SZ_1K requires explicit
>   include of linux/sizes.h on some platforms, keep it as a number
> 
>  drivers/misc/sram.c | 26 +++++++++++++++-----------
>  1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/misc/sram.c b/drivers/misc/sram.c
> index 999684a..b7a3a24 100644
> --- a/drivers/misc/sram.c
> +++ b/drivers/misc/sram.c
> @@ -41,8 +41,8 @@ struct sram_dev {
>  
>  struct sram_reserve {
>  	struct list_head list;
> -	u32 start;
> -	u32 size;
> +	phys_addr_t start;
> +	size_t size;
>  };
>  
>  static int sram_reserve_cmp(void *priv, struct list_head *a,
> @@ -60,7 +60,8 @@ static int sram_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>  	struct sram_dev *sram;
>  	struct resource *res;
>  	struct device_node *np = pdev->dev.of_node, *child;
> -	unsigned long size, cur_start, cur_size;
> +	phys_addr_t cur_start;
> +	size_t size, cur_size;
>  	struct sram_reserve *rblocks, *block;
>  	struct list_head reserve_list;
>  	unsigned int nblocks;
> @@ -138,9 +139,9 @@ static int sram_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>  		block->size = resource_size(&child_res);
>  		list_add_tail(&block->list, &reserve_list);
>  
> -		dev_dbg(&pdev->dev, "found reserved block 0x%x-0x%x\n",
> -			block->start,
> -			block->start + block->size);
> +		dev_dbg(&pdev->dev, "found reserved block 0x%llx-0x%llx\n",
> +			(unsigned long long)block->start,

Now that block->start is of type phys_addr_t, is there a reason not to
use %pa ?

> +			(unsigned long long)block->start + block->size);

		phys_addr_t end = block->start + block->size;

		dev_dbg(&pdev->dev, "found reserved block 0x%pa-0x%pa\n",
			&block->start, &end);
 
>  		block++;
>  	}
> @@ -158,8 +159,9 @@ static int sram_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>  		/* can only happen if sections overlap */
>  		if (block->start < cur_start) {
>  			dev_err(&pdev->dev,
> -				"block at 0x%x starts after current offset 0x%lx\n",
> -				block->start, cur_start);
> +				"block at 0x%llx starts after current offset 0x%llx\n",
> +				(unsigned long long)block->start,
> +				(unsigned long long)cur_start);

			dev_err(&pdev->dev,
				"block at 0x%pa starts after current offset 0x%pa\n",
				&block->start, &cur_start);

>  			ret = -EINVAL;
>  			goto err_chunks;
>  		}
> @@ -177,8 +179,9 @@ static int sram_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>  		 */
>  		cur_size = block->start - cur_start;
>  
> -		dev_dbg(&pdev->dev, "adding chunk 0x%lx-0x%lx\n",
> -			cur_start, cur_start + cur_size);
> +		dev_dbg(&pdev->dev, "adding chunk 0x%llx-0x%llx\n",
> +			(unsigned long long)cur_start,
> +			(unsigned long long)cur_start + cur_size);

		dev_dbg(&pdev->dev, "adding chunk 0x%pa-0x%pa\n",
			&cur_start, &block->start);

>  		ret = gen_pool_add_virt(sram->pool,
>  				(unsigned long)virt_base + cur_start,
>  				res->start + cur_start, cur_size, -1);
> @@ -193,7 +196,8 @@ static int sram_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>  
>  	platform_set_drvdata(pdev, sram);
>  
> -	dev_dbg(&pdev->dev, "SRAM pool: %ld KiB @ 0x%p\n", size / 1024, virt_base);
> +	dev_dbg(&pdev->dev, "SRAM pool: %zu KiB @ 0x%p\n",
> +		size / 1024, virt_base);
>  
>  	return 0;

regards
Philipp

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/