[RFC 03/23] ARM: LPAE: use phys_addr_t on virt <--> phys conversion
From: Cyril Chemparathy <hidden>
Date: 2012-07-24 10:55:42
Also in:
lkml
On 7/24/2012 6:37 AM, Catalin Marinas wrote:
On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 02:09:05AM +0100, Cyril Chemparathy wrote:quoted
This patch fixes up the types used when converting back and forth between physical and virtual addresses. Signed-off-by: Vitaly Andrianov <redacted> Signed-off-by: Cyril Chemparathy <redacted> --- arch/arm/include/asm/memory.h | 17 +++++++++++------ 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)diff --git a/arch/arm/include/asm/memory.h b/arch/arm/include/asm/memory.h index fcb5757..7629dfe 100644 --- a/arch/arm/include/asm/memory.h +++ b/arch/arm/include/asm/memory.h@@ -169,22 +169,27 @@ extern unsigned long __pv_phys_offset; : "=r" (to) \ : "r" (from), "I" (type)) -static inline unsigned long __virt_to_phys(unsigned long x) +static inline phys_addr_t __virt_to_phys(unsigned long x) { unsigned long t; __pv_stub(x, t, "add", __PV_BITS_31_24); return t; } -static inline unsigned long __phys_to_virt(unsigned long x) +static inline unsigned long __phys_to_virt(phys_addr_t x) { unsigned long t; __pv_stub(x, t, "sub", __PV_BITS_31_24); return t; }BTW, I would prefer if the phys-to-virt patching was fixed as well. It shouldn't be difficult.
On that topic - yes, we have this on our radar, but in our case we;re talking about patching (in head.S) and then repatching (at switch over). One of the ideas we've been bouncing around has been to convert the phys-virt patch code into arithmetic on PFNs. This way we don't have to get too messy with 64-bit in the patch code, and we can use the same patch code for both phys_to_virt and virt_to_phys. Thoughts on this approach? -- Thanks - Cyril