On Sat, Dec 15, 2018 at 2:45 PM Santhosh Raju <santhosh.raju%gmail.com@localhost> wrote: > > On Sat, Dec 15, 2018 at 2:26 PM matthew green <mrg%eterna.com.au@localhost> wrote: > > > > > I believe the right thing to do would be to just fix the type in > > > uvmexp.npages to the correct type instead of adjusting the test > > > to accommodate it. What would be the consequences of this? > > > > > > Also, I hadn't realised that the tests aren't wired into the > > > build. They really should be. > > > > please don't change any of the structures randomly -- see my > > previous email for the major issue needing to be resolved, > > which will end up making this better. (if you look closely, > > you'll see that the external interface is already 64 bit, > > it's only the internal code that is problematic. oh well, > > it would be the much less hard to fix part ... :-) > > > > This is good insight, thank you mrg for that. > > And I agree with the not changing structures randomly. (Especially by > someone like me who is just getting to see how things work.) > > > ie, i support the change as proposed, ugly as it may be. > > > > Yes the fix is a bit ugly. But the tests can be adapted as the > interface evolves. > > I do not mind holding the responsibility of keeping the tests updated > as the interface evolves. > > > > > .mrg. > > -- > Santhosh After discussing with cherry@ and considering the above advice from mrg@. I have made some cosmetic changes to the patch. * Removed unwanted whitespace changes * Renamed the variable used in the macro from A to X * Added a comment on top of the macro to indicate it's purpose If there are no more direct comments on the contents of the patch, I shall be committing the changes after waiting for a few hours. Regards Santhosh
Attachment:
t_uvm_physseg.build-fix.patch
Description: Binary data