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
