Re: [PATCH 0/2] unify DMA_..BIT_MASK definitions: v1

[Borislav Petkov]

On Tue, Sep 18, 2007 at 11:46:40AM +0530, Satyam Sharma wrote:
> Hi Borislav,
> 
> 
> On Tue, 18 Sep 2007, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> 
> > On Mon, Sep 17, 2007 at 11:01:21PM -0700, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
> > > Muli Ben-Yehuda wrote:
> > > >> +#define DMA_64BIT_MASK	DMA_BIT_MASK(64)
> > > >>     
> > > >
> > > > This one does not do what you mean. You need an explicit mask or a
> > > > ~0ULL here.
> > > 
> > > Yeah, I was just about to comment on it.  Its possible the compiler
> > > might decide to shift by x%64 = 0.
> > > 
> > >     J
> > ups, i knew that this might be a corner/boundary case. Thanks, updated patches
> > follow...
> 
> Please fold all three patches into a single patch in the updated series,
> otherwise git bisecters falling in between these patches will see the
> "redefinition ... previous definition was here" warnings of gcc ...

Will do later today, thanks.
-- 
Regards/Gruß,
    Boris.
-
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/