I believe the agreement we reached earlier was that *internally* (on
any
side of any interface), passing around a single PFN can be type
'unsigned long', since on 32-bit systems that still lets you manage 42
bits of physical memory, and that "should be good enough for anybody."
Yes. It's only the interface we want to change.
Unrelated to that, I converted all 'unsigned long' in the *interface*
to
be u64. The one exception is that PFN arrays (not single PFNs) became
'xen_pfn_t'.
Does that make sense?
It seems weird/arbitrary to me to change the type only of PFNs that are
array elements.
-- Keir
--
Hollis Blanchard
IBM Linux Technology Center
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel