Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Mon, 23 Aug 2021 17:11:09 -0400
From:   Alyssa Rosenzweig <alyssa@collabora.com>
To:     Steven Price <steven.price@arm.com>
Cc:     Alyssa Rosenzweig <alyssa.rosenzweig@collabora.com>,
        dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>,
        Tomeu Vizoso <tomeu.vizoso@collabora.com>,
        David Airlie <airlied@linux.ie>,
        Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Chris Morgan <macromorgan@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] drm/panfrost: Use u64 for size in lock_region
Message-ID: <YSQO7exgqnk0ZLJT@maud>
References: <20210820213117.13050-1-alyssa.rosenzweig@collabora.com>
 <20210820213117.13050-3-alyssa.rosenzweig@collabora.com>
 <71392001-a5a9-fee2-79a5-91df55ba3081@arm.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <71392001-a5a9-fee2-79a5-91df55ba3081@arm.com>
Precedence: bulk

> > Mali virtual addresses are 48-bit. Use a u64 instead of size_t to ensure
> > we can express the "lock everything" condition as ~0ULL without relying
> > on platform-specific behaviour.
> 
> 'platform-specific behaviour' makes it sound like this is something to
> do with a particular board. This is 32bit/64bit - it's going to be
> broken on 32bit: large lock regions are not going to work.

Oh, my. I used the term as a weasel word since the spec is loose on how
big a size_t actually is. But if this is causing actual breakage on
armv7 we're in trouble. I'll add a Cc stable tag on v2, unless the Fixes
implies that?

Thanks for pointing this out.