Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH 1/2] add phys_addr_t for holding physical addresses | From | Benjamin Herrenschmidt <> | Date | Tue, 12 Aug 2008 08:53:20 +1000 |
| |
On Mon, 2008-08-11 at 15:50 -0700, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote: > Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > > Are we sure resource_size_t is -never- used to represent memory ? I > > though it was on some platforms.... > > On x86 it's optionally used to put memory in the resource tree, but if > the memory is larger than can be held in resource_size_t it simply skips > it. Don't know about elsewhere.
That sounds like a good enough reason to not separate the two concepts..
Ben.
| |