[lkml]   [1999]   [Aug]   [19]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: What is the right type to store virtual address ?

On Thu, 19 Aug 1999, Petr Vandrovec wrote:
> if we are talking about endianess, I have one related small
> question: in variable of which type I should store return
> value from ioremap() ?

It shouldn't much matter for the simple reason that the only thing you can
do with the return value from ioremap() is to pass it in to read[bwl]()
and friends, and they (for historical reasons) accept both a pointer and a

So you might as well toss a coin - it has to be something you can do
arithmetic on because I want people to be able to just say "base+offset",
but again "unsigned long" and "void *" are equivalent on gcc in that
regard. If it wasn't for the arithmetic issue I'd just make it a special
type altogether to make the compiler warn about misuses.

For _true_ cleanliness, it should probably be something like

typedef struct {
unsigned long base;
} io_base_t;

* The ISA legacy region 640kB-1M is always mapped,
* here's the base
extern io_base_t isa_io_base;

extern io_base_t ioremap(unsigned long addr, unsigned long len);
extern unsigned char readb(io_base_t base, unsigned int offset);

but while I'd potentially like to see that I also wonder about just the
pain of doing the conversion.


To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:53    [W:0.043 / U:9.956 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site