Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 05 Oct 2007 15:32:45 -0700 | From | Jeremy Fitzhardinge <> | Subject | Re: [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/
| |