[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: user-level drivers
From: |
Richard Braun |
Subject: |
Re: user-level drivers |
Date: |
Mon, 9 May 2011 13:19:22 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) |
On Mon, May 09, 2011 at 12:17:51PM +0200, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> > Hmm, I guess we don't have anything that is better than using
> > vm_address_t for physical addresses? At least not in
> > include/mach/std_types.h, i386/include/mach/i386/vm_types.h. Should we?
> > (phys_address_t based on natural_t?)
>
> Maybe we should, indeed, else we can't do PAE.
I'd suggest using natural_t (or unsigned long) too. But then, it can't
be used to address >4 GiB physical memory. Consider expressing physical
memory in page frame numbers.
--
Richard Braun
Re: user-level drivers, olafBuddenhagen, 2011/05/26
Re: user-level drivers, olafBuddenhagen, 2011/05/26