On Tue, 18 Mar 2014 18:33:20 -0700, Grant Grundler wrote: > On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 10:13 PM, Cho KyongHo <pullip.cho@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > This commit introduces sysmmu_pte_t for page table entries and > > sysmmu_iova_t vor I/O virtual address that is manipulated by > > exynos-iommu driver. The purpose of the typedef is to remove > > dependencies to the driver code from the change of CPU architecture > > from 32 bit to 64 bit. > > hi Cho, > I noticed this before but understood this code was only compiled for > ILP-32 programming model. I'm assuming that is going to change in the > not-to-distant future. Good. :) > Thanks. > > > > Signed-off-by: Cho KyongHo <pullip.cho@xxxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > drivers/iommu/exynos-iommu.c | 103 ++++++++++++++++++++++-------------------- > > 1 file changed, 54 insertions(+), 49 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/iommu/exynos-iommu.c b/drivers/iommu/exynos-iommu.c > > index e375501..6e716cc 100644 > > --- a/drivers/iommu/exynos-iommu.c > > +++ b/drivers/iommu/exynos-iommu.c > > @@ -56,19 +56,19 @@ > > #define lv2ent_large(pent) ((*(pent) & 3) == 1) > > > > #define section_phys(sent) (*(sent) & SECT_MASK) > > -#define section_offs(iova) ((iova) & 0xFFFFF) > > +#define section_offs(iova) ((sysmmu_iova_t)(iova) & 0xFFFFF) > > The cast will mask abuses of iova. Define section_offs as a static > function and GCC can type check iova parameter to make sure it's a > sysmmu_iova_t. > Thoughts? > > I was thinking "((iova) & (sysmmu_iova_t) 0XFFFFF)" might do what you > want but it doesn't warn on abuse that I tried. I believe GCC knows > the upper bits are being ignored. Thank you for advice. I agree that type checking by compiler will be more helpful as you mentioned. Regards, KyongHo -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
