[Intel-gfx] [PATCH 8/8] drm/i915: prefer resource_size_t for everything stolen

[Chris Wilson]

Quoting Matthew Auld (2017-11-24 17:56:34)
> On 24 November 2017 at 16:54, Chris Wilson <chris at chris-wilson.co.uk> wrote:
> > Quoting Matthew Auld (2017-11-24 16:42:57)
> >> Keeps things consistent now that we make use of struct resource. This
> >> should keep us covered in case we ever get huge amounts of stolen
> >> memory.
> >>
> >> v2: bunch of missing conversions (Chris)
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Matthew Auld <matthew.auld at intel.com>
> >> Cc: Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen at linux.intel.com>
> >> Cc: Chris Wilson <chris at chris-wilson.co.uk>
> >> Cc: Paulo Zanoni <paulo.r.zanoni at intel.com>
> >> ---
> >> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c
> >> index a05e2b92c02c..248d18a255d8 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c
> >> @@ -523,7 +523,7 @@ static int i915_gem_object_info(struct seq_file *m, void *data)
> >>                    dpy_count, dpy_size);
> >>
> >>         seq_printf(m, "%llu [%llu] gtt total\n",
> >> -                  ggtt->base.total, ggtt->mappable_size);
> >> +                  ggtt->base.total, (u64)ggtt->mappable_size);
> >
> > resource_size_t uses %pa (same as phys_addr_t), which you used below.
> > Did it not work with seq_printf?
> 
> It does work, I just didn't fancy having a mix of decimal-integers
> with hexadecimal-integers when printing. Or don't we care?

Don't care that much, go hex.
-Chris