On 01.06.2012, at 00:07, Scott Wood wrote: > On 05/30/2012 06:00 AM, Alexander Graf wrote: >> We're passing the ram size as uint32_t, capping it to 32 bits atm. >> Change to target_phys_addr_t (uint64_t) to make sure we have all >> the bits. > > Wouldn't ram_addr_t be more appropriate?
I never quite grasped the difference, but wasn't ram_addr_t something for the host? Alex
