Andreas Schwab wrote:
> #define DMA_BIT_MASK(n) ((u64)-1 >> (64 - (n)))
>
Yeah, that's cleaner.
J
-
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/
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: [PATCH 1/1] unify DMA_..BIT_MASK definitions: v3.1
- From: Andrew Morton <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 1/1] unify DMA_..BIT_MASK definitions: v3.1
- References:
- Re: [PATCH 1/1] unify DMA_..BIT_MASK definitions: v3.1
- From: Andrew Morton <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 1/1] unify DMA_..BIT_MASK definitions: v3.1
- From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 1/1] unify DMA_..BIT_MASK definitions: v3.1
- From: Andrew Morton <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 1/1] unify DMA_..BIT_MASK definitions: v3.1
- From: "Robert P. J. Day" <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 1/1] unify DMA_..BIT_MASK definitions: v3.1
- From: Andreas Schwab <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 1/1] unify DMA_..BIT_MASK definitions: v3.1
- Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH 1/1] unify DMA_..BIT_MASK definitions: v3.1
- Next by Date: Re: __LITTLE_ENDIAN vs. __LITTLE_ENDIAN_BITFIELD
- Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH 1/1] unify DMA_..BIT_MASK definitions: v3.1
- Next by thread: Re: [PATCH 1/1] unify DMA_..BIT_MASK definitions: v3.1
- Index(es):
 |