On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 10:35 AM, Russell King - ARM Linux <li...@arm.linux.org.uk> wrote: > On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 10:11:44AM -0700, Olof Johansson wrote: >> Any >32bit-addressable machine will likely want 64-bit dma_addr_t as >> well. The only architecture that doesn't seem to set >> ARCH_DMA_ADDR_T_64BIT based on PHYS_ADDR_T size is ARM, and I think >> that should just be changed there as well.
The thread Joe linked to refers to a comment that is now deleted; sparc64 apparantly has 32-bit dma_addr_t at least, so there are platforms where the two differ permanently. Adding a new printk format is probably needed here after all. > Do we actually have any 64-bit DMA controllers out there? As far as > I'm aware, all our DMA controllers are all 32-bit address only. That > makes a 64-bit dma_addr_t rather silly. PCI/PCI-e is the large unknown here, I'm not actually sure if any of the current implementation of host controllers support it, but it would seem likely that server-class hardware does. -Olof -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/