From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755712Ab2HAPvT (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Aug 2012 11:51:19 -0400 Received: from smtp.eu.citrix.com ([62.200.22.115]:25461 "EHLO SMTP.EU.CITRIX.COM" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755605Ab2HAPvS (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Aug 2012 11:51:18 -0400 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.77,694,1336348800"; d="scan'208";a="13807442" Date: Wed, 1 Aug 2012 16:50:59 +0100 From: Stefano Stabellini X-X-Sender: sstabellini@kaball.uk.xensource.com To: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk CC: Stefano Stabellini , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "xen-devel@lists.xensource.com" , Ian Campbell , "Tim (Xen.org)" , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , "linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org" , "catalin.marinas@arm.com" , "arnd@arndb.de" Subject: Re: [PATCH 08/24] xen/arm: Introduce xen_pfn_t for pfn and mfn types In-Reply-To: <20120801142249.GF7227@phenom.dumpdata.com> Message-ID: References: <1343316846-25860-8-git-send-email-stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com> <20120801142249.GF7227@phenom.dumpdata.com> User-Agent: Alpine 2.02 (DEB 1266 2009-07-14) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 1 Aug 2012, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote: > On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 04:33:50PM +0100, Stefano Stabellini wrote: > > All the original Xen headers have xen_pfn_t as mfn and pfn type, however > > when they have been imported in Linux, xen_pfn_t has been replaced with > > unsigned long. That might work for x86 and ia64 but it does not for arm. > > How come? see below > > Bring back xen_pfn_t and let each architecture define xen_pfn_t as they > > see fit. > > I am OK with this as long as your include a comment in both of the > interface.h saying why this is needed. I am curious why 'unsinged long' > won't work? Is it b/c on ARM you always want a 64-bit type? Yes, we would like to make the same interface work for 32 and 64 bit guests, without any need for a "compat layer" as we currently have on x86. In fact I am going to add another patch to explicitly size all the other unsigned long that we have in the public interface.