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 [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
