Re: [PATCH 07/13] efi_loader: Make more use of ulong

2024-11-26 Thread Simon Glass
Hi Heinrich, On Tue, 26 Nov 2024 at 03:13, Heinrich Schuchardt wrote: > > On 26.11.24 09:00, Ilias Apalodimas wrote: > > Hi Simon, > > > > > > On Mon, 25 Nov 2024 at 22:45, Simon Glass wrote: > >> > >> One of the confusing parts of the EFI loader is that it uses u64 for > >> addresses, whereas t

Re: [PATCH 07/13] efi_loader: Make more use of ulong

2024-11-26 Thread Simon Glass
Hi Ilias, On Tue, 26 Nov 2024 at 01:01, Ilias Apalodimas wrote: > > Hi Simon, > > > On Mon, 25 Nov 2024 at 22:45, Simon Glass wrote: > > > > One of the confusing parts of the EFI loader is that it uses u64 for > > addresses, whereas the rest of U-Boot typically uses ulong. > > > > There is a cas

Re: [PATCH 07/13] efi_loader: Make more use of ulong

2024-11-26 Thread Heinrich Schuchardt
On 26.11.24 09:00, Ilias Apalodimas wrote: Hi Simon, On Mon, 25 Nov 2024 at 22:45, Simon Glass wrote: One of the confusing parts of the EFI loader is that it uses u64 for addresses, whereas the rest of U-Boot typically uses ulong. You are confusing sandbox virtual addresses (phys_addr_t) w

Re: [PATCH 07/13] efi_loader: Make more use of ulong

2024-11-26 Thread Ilias Apalodimas
Hi Simon, On Mon, 25 Nov 2024 at 22:45, Simon Glass wrote: > > One of the confusing parts of the EFI loader is that it uses u64 for > addresses, whereas the rest of U-Boot typically uses ulong. > > There is a case on 32-bit machines where phys_addr_t can be larger than > 32 bits, but this is ver

[PATCH 07/13] efi_loader: Make more use of ulong

2024-11-25 Thread Simon Glass
One of the confusing parts of the EFI loader is that it uses u64 for addresses, whereas the rest of U-Boot typically uses ulong. There is a case on 32-bit machines where phys_addr_t can be larger than 32 bits, but this is very much the exception. Also, such machines have mostly faded away and gene