[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1703271644210.3616@nanos>
Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2017 16:46:06 +0200 (CEST)
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To: Mason <slash.tmp@...e.fr>
cc: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@....com>,
Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@...nel.org>,
Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>,
Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@....com>,
Liviu Dudau <liviu.dudau@....com>,
David Laight <david.laight@...lab.com>,
linux-pci <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
Thibaud Cornic <thibaud_cornic@...madesigns.com>,
Phuong Nguyen <phuong_nguyen@...madesigns.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v0.2] PCI: Add support for tango PCIe host bridge
On Mon, 27 Mar 2017, Mason wrote:
> On 24/03/2017 19:22, Marc Zyngier wrote:
>
> > You cannot directly use a pointer to a u32 in any of the bitmap
> > operations. You need to copy the value to an unsigned long, and
> > apply the bitmap op on that.
>
> On my platform, find_first_zero_bit() resolves to
>
> int _find_first_zero_bit_le(const void * p, unsigned size);
>
> If the underlying implementation actually expects an unsigned long
> pointer, should the function prototype be changed?
Errm? Why are you worrying about the underlying implementations?
find_first_zero_bit() is what you are supposed to use in your code. And
that explicitely takes a unsigned long pointer.
Thanks,
tglx
Powered by blists - more mailing lists