On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 4:10 PM, Alan Cox <a...@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 2015-04-17 at 16:59 +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
>> On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 02:31:49PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
>> > On Fri, 2015-04-17 at 11:20 +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
>> > > Actually, my patch seems like a good idea to me but it's one of those
>> > > things that someone should probably test. Unless someone can test
>> > > goldfish on a 32 bit system with 64 bit dma addresses
>> >
>> > No such "system" exists.
>>
>> I don't understand. We definitely can have 64bit dma addresses on
>> x86_32.
>
>
> Yes but no actual Goldfish environment is built that way
Isn't this a simpler fix?
diff --git a/drivers/staging/goldfish/goldfish_nand.c
b/drivers/staging/goldfish/goldfish_nand.c
index 213877a..053ac11 100644
--- a/drivers/staging/goldfish/goldfish_nand.c
+++ b/drivers/staging/goldfish/goldfish_nand.c
@@ -87,7 +87,7 @@ static u32 goldfish_nand_cmd(struct mtd_info *mtd, enum
nand_cmd cmd,
writel((u32)(addr >> 32), base + NAND_ADDR_HIGH);
writel((u32)addr, base + NAND_ADDR_LOW);
writel(len, base + NAND_TRANSFER_SIZE);
- gf_write64((u64)ptr, base + NAND_DATA, base + NAND_DATA_HIGH);
+ gf_write64((unsigned long)ptr, base + NAND_DATA, base +
NAND_DATA_HIGH);
writel(cmd, base + NAND_COMMAND);
rv = readl(base + NAND_RESULT);
}
--
Peter
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
de...@linuxdriverproject.org
http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
