Hi Vladimir, Am Freitag, den 29.05.2015, 14:31 +0300 schrieb Vladimir Zapolskiy: [...] > > res->start is of type phys_addr_t (well, resource_size_t) already. > > block->start/size and cur_start/size are just offsets added to it. > > I agree. > > > I wonder if it wouldn't be more appropriate to use resource_size_t for > > the sram_reserve .start field. > > Assuming that the sram_reserve .start field represents only the difference > of two res->start and this difference fits into u32 storage, it should be > safe to keep it as is. > > In my opinion integer overflow case should not be considered or handled > by the driver, so probably the best option would be just to drop > phys_addr_t commit, since it attempts to solve a nonexistent problem. > > Please let me know your opinion, if it is fine with you, I'll remove > "use phys_addr_t instead of u32 for physical address" commit and resend > the series.
Yes, that's fine with me. regards Philipp -- 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/
