RE: [PATCH v4 4/5] ARM: annotate VMALLOC_END definition with _AC

[Michal Simek]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Josh Cartwright [mailto:josh.cartwright@xxxxxx]
> Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2012 10:05 PM
> To: arm@xxxxxxxxxx; Arnd Bergmann
> Cc: linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; John
> Linn; Nick Bowler; Michal Simek
> Subject: [PATCH v4 4/5] ARM: annotate VMALLOC_END definition with _AC
> 
> This makes the definition of VMALLOC_END suitable for use within assembly
> code.  This is necessary to allow the use of VMALLOC_END in defining where the
> early uart is mapped for use with DEBUG_LL.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Josh Cartwright <josh.cartwright@xxxxxx>
> Acked-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx>
> ---
>  arch/arm/include/asm/pgtable.h | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/arm/include/asm/pgtable.h b/arch/arm/include/asm/pgtable.h
> index 08c1231..72904a2 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/include/asm/pgtable.h
> +++ b/arch/arm/include/asm/pgtable.h
> @@ -40,7 +40,7 @@
>   */
>  #define VMALLOC_OFFSET		(8*1024*1024)
>  #define VMALLOC_START		(((unsigned long)high_memory +
> VMALLOC_OFFSET) & ~(VMALLOC_OFFSET-1))
> -#define VMALLOC_END		0xff000000UL
> +#define VMALLOC_END		_AC(0xff000000,UL)

This shouldn't be the part of this series but should go to mainline through different tree.
Arnd, Olof: Can you take this patch to your arm-soc tree? 

I don't think it is a good workstyle to propose it to mainline through zynq soc tree.
What do you think?

Thanks,
Michal


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/