[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4706A20A.5060603@goop.org>
Date: Fri, 05 Oct 2007 13:43:54 -0700
From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
CC: bbpetkov@...oo.de, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, muli@...ibm.com,
satyam@...radead.org, amitkale@...xen.com,
achim_leubner@...ptec.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] unify DMA_..BIT_MASK definitions: v3.1
Andrew Morton wrote:
> From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
>
> Now that we have DMA_BIT_MASK(), these macros are pointless.
>
Except, unfortunately, DMA_64BIT_MASK. I guess we could special case
it, assuming this works in all the contexts the macro is used in (ie,
compile-time constant?):
#define DMA_BIT_MASK(n) (((n) == 64) ? ~0ULL : ((1ULL<<(n))-1))
J
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists