Re: [PATCH] powerpc/85xx: Fix sram_offset parameter type

2012-07-19 Thread Kumar Gala

On Jul 19, 2012, at 5:28 AM, Claudiu Manoil wrote:

> The sram_offset parameter represents a physical address
> and should be of type phys_addr_t. As part of this fix,
> the extraction of sram_params is being cleaned-up and
> fixed.
> This patch fixes now the case when the offset value of
> 0xfff0 was being rejected by the driver (returning
> -EINVAL), although this is a valid offset value.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Tang Yuantian 
> Signed-off-by: Claudiu Manoil 
> ---
> arch/powerpc/sysdev/fsl_85xx_cache_ctlr.h |4 +-
> arch/powerpc/sysdev/fsl_85xx_l2ctlr.c |   39 ++--
> 2 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 27 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/sysdev/fsl_85xx_cache_ctlr.h 
> b/arch/powerpc/sysdev/fsl_85xx_cache_ctlr.h
> index 60c9c0b..a4ce9b8 100644
> --- a/arch/powerpc/sysdev/fsl_85xx_cache_ctlr.h
> +++ b/arch/powerpc/sysdev/fsl_85xx_cache_ctlr.h
> @@ -1,5 +1,5 @@
> /*
> - * Copyright 2009-2010 Freescale Semiconductor, Inc
> + * Copyright 2009-2010 2012 Freescale Semiconductor, Inc

we normally do 2009-2010, 2012

>  *
>  * QorIQ based Cache Controller Memory Mapped Registers
>  *
> @@ -91,7 +91,7 @@ struct mpc85xx_l2ctlr {
> 
> struct sram_parameters {
>   unsigned int sram_size;
> - uint64_t sram_offset;
> + phys_addr_t sram_offset;
> };
> 
> 

- k


___
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev


Re: [PATCH] powerpc/85xx: Fix sram_offset parameter type

2012-07-26 Thread Claudiu Manoil

On 7/19/2012 3:07 PM, Kumar Gala wrote:


On Jul 19, 2012, at 5:28 AM, Claudiu Manoil wrote:


The sram_offset parameter represents a physical address
and should be of type phys_addr_t. As part of this fix,
the extraction of sram_params is being cleaned-up and
fixed.
This patch fixes now the case when the offset value of
0xfff0 was being rejected by the driver (returning
-EINVAL), although this is a valid offset value.

Signed-off-by: Tang Yuantian 
Signed-off-by: Claudiu Manoil 
---
arch/powerpc/sysdev/fsl_85xx_cache_ctlr.h |4 +-
arch/powerpc/sysdev/fsl_85xx_l2ctlr.c |   39 ++--
2 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 27 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/powerpc/sysdev/fsl_85xx_cache_ctlr.h 
b/arch/powerpc/sysdev/fsl_85xx_cache_ctlr.h
index 60c9c0b..a4ce9b8 100644
--- a/arch/powerpc/sysdev/fsl_85xx_cache_ctlr.h
+++ b/arch/powerpc/sysdev/fsl_85xx_cache_ctlr.h
@@ -1,5 +1,5 @@
/*
- * Copyright 2009-2010 Freescale Semiconductor, Inc
+ * Copyright 2009-2010 2012 Freescale Semiconductor, Inc


we normally do 2009-2010, 2012


Hi Kumar,

Should I re-spin this patch, with the copyright year formatted per your 
suggestion above?


Thanks,
claudiu


___
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev


Re: [PATCH] powerpc/85xx: Fix sram_offset parameter type

2012-07-26 Thread Kumar Gala

On Jul 26, 2012, at 7:39 AM, Claudiu Manoil wrote:

> On 7/19/2012 3:07 PM, Kumar Gala wrote:
>> 
>> On Jul 19, 2012, at 5:28 AM, Claudiu Manoil wrote:
>> 
>>> The sram_offset parameter represents a physical address
>>> and should be of type phys_addr_t. As part of this fix,
>>> the extraction of sram_params is being cleaned-up and
>>> fixed.
>>> This patch fixes now the case when the offset value of
>>> 0xfff0 was being rejected by the driver (returning
>>> -EINVAL), although this is a valid offset value.
>>> 
>>> Signed-off-by: Tang Yuantian 
>>> Signed-off-by: Claudiu Manoil 
>>> ---
>>> arch/powerpc/sysdev/fsl_85xx_cache_ctlr.h |4 +-
>>> arch/powerpc/sysdev/fsl_85xx_l2ctlr.c |   39 
>>> ++--
>>> 2 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 27 deletions(-)
>>> 
>>> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/sysdev/fsl_85xx_cache_ctlr.h 
>>> b/arch/powerpc/sysdev/fsl_85xx_cache_ctlr.h
>>> index 60c9c0b..a4ce9b8 100644
>>> --- a/arch/powerpc/sysdev/fsl_85xx_cache_ctlr.h
>>> +++ b/arch/powerpc/sysdev/fsl_85xx_cache_ctlr.h
>>> @@ -1,5 +1,5 @@
>>> /*
>>> - * Copyright 2009-2010 Freescale Semiconductor, Inc
>>> + * Copyright 2009-2010 2012 Freescale Semiconductor, Inc
>> 
>> we normally do 2009-2010, 2012
>> 
> Hi Kumar,
> 
> Should I re-spin this patch, with the copyright year formatted per your 
> suggestion above?

please do

- k
___
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev