On 7/24/2015 9:26 AM, Will Deacon wrote:
On Fri, Jul 24, 2015 at 05:21:49PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote:
On Fri, Jul 24, 2015 at 03:57:08PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 10:59:19PM +0100, Jonathan (Zhixiong) Zhang wrote:
diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/acpi.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/acpi.h
+static inline pgprot_t arch_apei_get_mem_attribute(phys_addr_t addr)
+{
+ pgprot_t prot;
+
+ prot = efi_mem_attributes(addr);
+ if (prot & EFI_MEMORY_UC)
+ return PROT_DEVICE_nGnRnE;
+ if (prot & EFI_MEMORY_WC)
+ return PROT_NORMAL_NC;
Can we not use pgprot_noncached and pgprot_writecombine for these two?
Actually, why do we even use pgprot_t for prot here? EFI_MEMORY_* don't
have anything to do with the arch-specific pgprot_t.
Good point; the pgprot_t confused me, so my suggestion is much use after
ll. We're better off with a u64 to avoid further confusion.
Got it. Thanks for the catch, Will/Catalin.
--
Jonathan (Zhixiong) Zhang
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum,
a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project
--
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/
