Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20200402203317.GA34560@ubuntu-m2-xlarge-x86> <20200402215926.30714-1-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
 <20200403013420.GA11516@ubuntu-m2-xlarge-x86> <CAKMK7uE9pv23edViQBC=Jy5fQV=-NQTNdk1qi91Z8shpeuL7FA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAHk-=whMhCTdx0fDRnNT4doKGYw1BBBei0KcXDZcmtVpk_GvEw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAHk-=whMhCTdx0fDRnNT4doKGYw1BBBei0KcXDZcmtVpk_GvEw@mail.gmail.com>
From:   Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>
Date:   Fri, 3 Apr 2020 19:16:28 +0200
Message-ID: <CAKMK7uE2t=z71dtJitmoKwrrZxgciEDRrNPMQ1FyiLO7s-VKag@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/legacy: Fix type for drm_local_map.offset
To:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc:     Nathan Chancellor <natechancellor@gmail.com>,
        Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        dri-devel <dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Apr 3, 2020 at 7:14 PM Linus Torvalds
<torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Apr 3, 2020 at 1:29 AM Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch> wrote:
> >
> > > Tested-by: Nathan Chancellor <natechancellor@gmail.com> # build
> >
> > This works too, missed it when replying to Linus
> >
> > Reviewed-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
> >
> > Linus I guess this one is better, but like I explained it really
> > doesn't matter what we do with drm legacy code, it's a horror show
> > that should be disabled on all modern distros anyway. We just keep it
> > because of "never break old uapi".
>
> Ok, That patch from Chris looks fine to me too.
>
> dma_addr_t and resource_size_t aren't the same, but at least
> dma_addr_t should always be the bigger one.
>
> And it does look like nothing else ever takes the address of this
> field, so the ones that might want just the resource_size_t part will
> at least have enough bits.
>
> So I think Chris' patch is the way to go. I'm assuming I'll get it
> through the normal drm tree channels, this doesn't sound _so_ urgent
> that I'd need to expedite that patch into my tree and apply it
> directly.

Ok, sounds good.

Chris can you pls push this to drm-misc-next-fixes? That should be
enough for the pull request train next week.
-Daniel
-- 
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
+41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch