[PATCH] of: Specify initrd location using 64-bit
From: geert@linux-m68k.org (Geert Uytterhoeven)
Date: 2013-06-29 08:34:27
Also in:
linux-devicetree, linux-mips, linuxppc-dev
Possibly related (same subject, not in this thread)
- 2013-07-01 · Re: [PATCH] of: Specify initrd location using 64-bit · Santosh Shilimkar <hidden>
- 2013-07-01 · Re: [PATCH] of: Specify initrd location using 64-bit · Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
- 2013-07-01 · Re: [PATCH] of: Specify initrd location using 64-bit · Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>
- 2013-07-01 · Re: [PATCH] of: Specify initrd location using 64-bit · Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <hidden>
- 2013-06-28 · Re: [PATCH] of: Specify initrd location using 64-bit · Grant Likely <hidden>
On Sat, Jun 29, 2013 at 1:43 AM, Santosh Shilimkar [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
Rob, Are you ok with phys_addr_t since your concern was about rest of the memory specific bits of the device-tree code use u64 ?No. I still think it should be u64 for same reasons I said originally.+1+1 fix typeApart from waste of 32bit, what is the other concern you have ? I really want to converge on this patch because it has been a open ended discussion for quite some time. Does that really break any thing on x86 or your concern is more from semantics of the physical address.
As the "original reasons" were not in this thread, I had to search a bit. I suppose you mean this one: https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/9/13/544 ? Summarized: | The address to load the initrd is decided by the bootloader/user and set | at that point later in time. | The dtb should not be tied to the kernel you are booting. Gr{oetje,eeting}s, Geert -- Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert at linux-m68k.org In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that. -- Linus Torvalds