On 12 January 2012 22:56, Anthony Liguori <aligu...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> This code is broken in its current form.  target_phys_addr_t has an
> unspecified width which is why we provide a FMT for it.

I don't think it's been clear that target_phys_addr_t has a
width which might not be the width of the target's physical
addresses (as opposed to it having a width that's unspecified
because you don't know what target you're running on and
therefore don't know how big its physical addresses are).

It might be worth adding a note to HACKING that
target_phys_addr_t is guaranteed to be able to hold a
physical address but might be bigger than one.

-- PMM

Reply via email to