On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 4:10 PM, Alan Cox <alan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Fri, 2015-04-17 at 16:59 +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote: >> On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 02:31:49PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote: >> > On Fri, 2015-04-17 at 11:20 +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote: >> > > Actually, my patch seems like a good idea to me but it's one of those >> > > things that someone should probably test. Unless someone can test >> > > goldfish on a 32 bit system with 64 bit dma addresses >> > >> > No such "system" exists. >> >> I don't understand. We definitely can have 64bit dma addresses on >> x86_32. > > > Yes but no actual Goldfish environment is built that way Isn't this a simpler fix? diff --git a/drivers/staging/goldfish/goldfish_nand.c b/drivers/staging/goldfish/goldfish_nand.c index 213877a..053ac11 100644 --- a/drivers/staging/goldfish/goldfish_nand.c +++ b/drivers/staging/goldfish/goldfish_nand.c @@ -87,7 +87,7 @@ static u32 goldfish_nand_cmd(struct mtd_info *mtd, enum nand_cmd cmd, writel((u32)(addr >> 32), base + NAND_ADDR_HIGH); writel((u32)addr, base + NAND_ADDR_LOW); writel(len, base + NAND_TRANSFER_SIZE); - gf_write64((u64)ptr, base + NAND_DATA, base + NAND_DATA_HIGH); + gf_write64((unsigned long)ptr, base + NAND_DATA, base + NAND_DATA_HIGH); writel(cmd, base + NAND_COMMAND); rv = readl(base + NAND_RESULT); } -- Peter _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
