[PATCH v2 3/3][MTD] P4080/mtd: Fix the freescale lbc issue with 36bit mode

[Zang Roy-R61911]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Wood Scott-B07421
> Sent: Tuesday, September 14, 2010 0:28 AM
> To: Zang Roy-R61911
> Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven; linux-mtd at lists.infradead.org; Wood Scott-B07421;
> dedekind1 at gmail.com; Lan Chunhe-B25806; linuxppc-dev at ozlabs.org; akpm at linux-
> foundation.org; dwmw2 at infradead.org; Gala Kumar-B11780
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/3][MTD] P4080/mtd: Fix the freescale lbc issue with
> 36bit mode
> 
> On Mon, 13 Sep 2010 00:22:10 -0700
> "Zang Roy-R61911" <r61911 at freescale.com> wrote:
> 
> >
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: geert.uytterhoeven at gmail.com [mailto:geert.uytterhoeven at gmail.com]
> On
> > > Behalf Of Geert Uytterhoeven
> > > Sent: Thursday, September 09, 2010 19:06 PM
> > > To: Zang Roy-R61911
> > > Cc: linux-mtd at lists.infradead.org; Wood Scott-B07421; dedekind1 at gmail.com;
> Lan
> > > Chunhe-B25806; linuxppc-dev at ozlabs.org; akpm at linux-foundation.org;
> > > dwmw2 at infradead.org; Gala Kumar-B11780
> > > Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/3][MTD] P4080/mtd: Fix the freescale lbc issue
> with
> > > 36bit mode
> > >
> > > On Thu, Sep 9, 2010 at 12:20, Roy Zang <tie-fei.zang at freescale.com> wrote:
> > > > From: Lan Chunhe-B25806 <b25806 at freescale.com>
> > > >
> > > > When system uses 36bit physical address, res.start is 36bit
> > > > physical address. But the function of in_be32 returns 32bit
> > > > physical address. Then both of them compared each other is
> > > > wrong. So by converting the address of res.start into
> > > > the right format fixes this issue.
> > >
> > > >  /**
> > > > + * fsl_lbc_addr - convert the base address
> > > > + * @addr_base: base address of the memory bank
> > > > + *
> > > > + * This function converts a base address of lbc into the right format
> for
> > > the BR
> > > > + * registers. If the SOC has eLBC then it returns 32bit physical
> address
> > > else
> > > > + * it returns 34bit physical address for local bus(Example: MPC8641).
> > > > + */
> > > > +unsigned int fsl_lbc_addr(phys_addr_t addr_base)
> > >     ^^^^^^^^^^^^
> > > Shouldn't this be u32 or __be32, for consistency with the actual
> > > comparisons below?
> > __be32 is better.
> 
> I disagree, the return from this function is native-endian.  It should
> be u32.
But the return of this value is ONLY used for br comparing. It is big endia.
Thanks.
Roy