On Sun, 5 Aug 2012, Cyril Chemparathy wrote: > On 8/4/2012 3:04 AM, Nicolas Pitre wrote: > > On Tue, 31 Jul 2012, Cyril Chemparathy wrote: > > > > > This patch modifies the switch_mm() processor functions to use 64-bit > > > addresses. We use u64 instead of phys_addr_t, in order to avoid having > > > config > > > dependent register usage when calling into switch_mm assembly code. > > > > > > The changes in this patch are primarily adjustments for registers used for > > > arguments to switch_mm. The few processor definitions that did use the > > > second > > > argument have been modified accordingly. > > > > > > Arguments and calling conventions aside, this patch should be a no-op on > > > v6 > > > and non-LPAE v7 processors. > > > > NAK. > > > > You just broke all big endian targets, LPAE or not. > > > > Indeed. Thanks. > > Would C-land word swappery on BE do? Any other ideas on the best approach to > this?
First, don't use a u64 unconditionally. A phys_addr_t is best for the same arguments as before. Since this is equivalent to a u64 only when LPAE is defined, you then only have to care about endian issues in proc-v7-3level.S. And in there you can deal with the issue with register aliases just as it is done in lib/div64.S. Nicolas -- 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/
