2018-03-09 23:56 GMT+01:00 Andy Gross <andy.gross@xxxxxxxxxx>:
> On Tue, Mar 06, 2018 at 01:33:20PM +0100, Benjamin Gaignard wrote:
>> From: Benjamin Gaignard <benjamin.gaignard@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>
>> dma_alloc_coherent expects it third argument type to be dma_addr_t and
>> not phys_addr_t.
>> When phys_addr_t is defined as u32 and dma_addr_t as u64 that generate
>> a compilation issue.
>> Change the variable name because dma_alloc_coherent returns a bus
>> address not a physical address.
>>
>> Fixes: d82bd359972a7 ("firmware: scm: Add new SCM call API for switching memory ownership")
>
> Benjamin,
>
> This brings up an old discussion regarding the nature of the memory we are using
> for SCM transactions (per Arnd's comments on the original). I'd like to defer
> taking this until we get some clarification on the long term plans for fixing
> the underlying issues and not just this type issue. I'd hope to have some
> answer one way or the other in the next week and a half.
Hi Andy,
Any news on this topic ?
Regards,
Benjamin
>
> For now, I have this patch and will hold on to it. Thanks for the contribution.
>
> Regards,
>
> Andy Gross
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-soc" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
