On Thu, 2015-03-26 at 10:31 -0500, Emil Medve wrote:
Hello Kumar,
On 03/26/2015 10:18 AM, Kumar Gala wrote:
quoted
Why no commit message with what issue this change was trying to fix?
A while back, when I attempted to remove bootmem (in favor of just plain
memblock as in powerpc land bootmem was just a wrapper to memblock
anyway) I run at some point into a problem with an intermediate address
value because of this '<< PAGE_SHIFT' on the wrong width variable. Using
PFN_PHYS() took care of it (it has a cast) so I decided to get this
defensive patch applied. Since, I dropped my bootmem/memblock patches in
favor to Anton's (Blanchard) work so my concrete issue example is
somewhat gone
I'm not a big fan of it unless it's actually fixing an issue. It's a lot of
churn and the end result is less readable IMHO.
cheers