On Fri, Apr 3, 2020 at 7:14 PM Linus Torvalds <torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Fri, Apr 3, 2020 at 1:29 AM Daniel Vetter <daniel@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > Tested-by: Nathan Chancellor <natechancellor@xxxxxxxxx> # build > > > > This works too, missed it when replying to Linus > > > > Reviewed-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@xxxxxxxx> > > > > Linus I guess this one is better, but like I explained it really > > doesn't matter what we do with drm legacy code, it's a horror show > > that should be disabled on all modern distros anyway. We just keep it > > because of "never break old uapi". > > Ok, That patch from Chris looks fine to me too. > > dma_addr_t and resource_size_t aren't the same, but at least > dma_addr_t should always be the bigger one. > > And it does look like nothing else ever takes the address of this > field, so the ones that might want just the resource_size_t part will > at least have enough bits. > > So I think Chris' patch is the way to go. I'm assuming I'll get it > through the normal drm tree channels, this doesn't sound _so_ urgent > that I'd need to expedite that patch into my tree and apply it > directly. Ok, sounds good. Chris can you pls push this to drm-misc-next-fixes? That should be enough for the pull request train next week. -Daniel -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation +41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
