Re: [PATCH] Use phys_addr_t type for physical address (arm64)

[Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>]

On Wed, Oct 01, 2014 at 03:26:55PM +0100, Min-Hua Chen wrote:
> I found that valid_phys_addr_range does not use
> phys_addr_t to describe physical address.
> Is it better to change the type from unsigned long to phys_addr_t?

Yes, that looks like a sensible change. Both types are 64-bit on arm64, so
it shouldn't affect functionality. Can you resend as a proper patch (with
commit message) please?

Will

> Signed-off-by: Min-Hua Chen<orca.chen@gmail.com>
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/io.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/io.h
> index e0ecdcf..f771e8b 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/io.h
> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/io.h
> @@ -243,7 +243,7 @@ extern void __iomem *ioremap_cache(phys_addr_t
> phys_addr, size_t size);
>   * (PHYS_OFFSET and PHYS_MASK taken into account).
>   */
>  #define ARCH_HAS_VALID_PHYS_ADDR_RANGE
> -extern int valid_phys_addr_range(unsigned long addr, size_t size);
> +extern int valid_phys_addr_range(phys_addr_t addr, size_t size);
>  extern int valid_mmap_phys_addr_range(unsigned long pfn, size_t size);
> 
>  extern int devmem_is_allowed(unsigned long pfn);
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/mmap.c b/arch/arm64/mm/mmap.c
> index 8ed6cb1..1d73662 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/mm/mmap.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/mm/mmap.c
> @@ -102,7 +102,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(arch_pick_mmap_layout);
>   * You really shouldn't be using read() or write() on /dev/mem.  This might go
>   * away in the future.
>   */
> -int valid_phys_addr_range(unsigned long addr, size_t size)
> +int valid_phys_addr_range(phys_addr_t addr, size_t size)
>  {
>      if (addr < PHYS_OFFSET)
>          return 0;
> -- 
> 1.7.10.4
>