lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Oct]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 1/1] unify DMA_..BIT_MASK definitions: v3.1
Andrew Morton wrote:
> Well yes, but DMA_BIT_MASK(0) invokes undefined behaviour, generates a
> compiler warning and evaluates to 0xffffffffffffffff (with my setup).
>
> That won't be a problem in practice, but it is strictly wrong and doesn't set
> a good exmaple for the children ;)
>

It's interesting that it doesn't seem to be possible to define this
without invoking some undefined behaviour. But a device that supports 0
bits of DMA address probably isn't terribly concerned about this - it's
certainly better than making 64 bit masks warty.

J
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2007-10-06 00:35    [W:0.049 / U:0.228 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site