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? -Scott
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? -Scott