On 13 January 2017 at 11:22, Mark Rutland <mark.rutl...@arm.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 01:59:35PM +0800, miles.c...@mediatek.com wrote:
>> From: Miles Chen <miles.c...@mediatek.com>
>>
>> Use phys_addr_t instead of unsigned long for the
>> return value of __pa(), make code easy to understand.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Miles Chen <miles.c...@mediatek.com>
>
> This looks sensible to me. It's consistent with the types these
> variables are compared against, and with the types of function
> parameters these are passed as.
>
Indeed. But doesn't it clash with Laura's series?
> Acked-by: Mark Rutland <mark.rutl...@arm.com>
>
> Thanks,
> Mark.
>
>> ---
>> arch/arm64/mm/mmu.c | 4 ++--
>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/mmu.c b/arch/arm64/mm/mmu.c
>> index 17243e4..7eb7c21 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm64/mm/mmu.c
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/mm/mmu.c
>> @@ -359,8 +359,8 @@ static void create_mapping_late(phys_addr_t phys,
>> unsigned long virt,
>>
>> static void __init __map_memblock(pgd_t *pgd, phys_addr_t start,
>> phys_addr_t end)
>> {
>> - unsigned long kernel_start = __pa(_text);
>> - unsigned long kernel_end = __pa(__init_begin);
>> + phys_addr_t kernel_start = __pa(_text);
>> + phys_addr_t kernel_end = __pa(__init_begin);
>>
>> /*
>> * Take care not to create a writable alias for the
>> --
>> 1.9.1
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> linux-arm-kernel mailing list
>> linux-arm-ker...@lists.infradead.org
>> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
>
> _______________________________________________
> linux-arm-kernel mailing list
> linux-arm-ker...@lists.infradead.org
> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
