Re: [PATCH] ULL fixes for qlogicfc

[Arjan van de Ven]

On Mon, 2003-09-29 at 22:25, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> Followup to:  <20030929172329.GD6526@xxxxxxx>
> By author:    Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@xxxxxxxxx>
> In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel
> >
> > On Mon, Sep 29, 2003 at 06:04:34PM +0100, davej@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> > > diff -urpN --exclude-from=/home/davej/.exclude bk-linus/drivers/scsi/qlogicfc.c linux-2.5/drivers/scsi/qlogicfc.c
> > > --- bk-linus/drivers/scsi/qlogicfc.c	2003-09-08 00:47:00.000000000 +0100
> > > +++ linux-2.5/drivers/scsi/qlogicfc.c	2003-09-08 01:30:56.000000000 +0100
> > > @@ -718,8 +718,8 @@ int isp2x00_detect(Scsi_Host_Template * 
> > >  				continue;
> > >  
> > >  			/* Try to configure DMA attributes. */
> > > -			if (pci_set_dma_mask(pdev, (u64) 0xffffffffffffffff) &&
> > > -			    pci_set_dma_mask(pdev, (u64) 0xffffffff))
> > > +			if (pci_set_dma_mask(pdev, 0xffffffffffffffffULL) &&
> > > +			    pci_set_dma_mask(pdev, 0xffffffffULL))
> > >  					continue;
> > 
> > Looks great.
> > 
> > I wonder if you are motivated to create similar pci_set_dma_mask()
> > cleanups for other drivers?  ;-)  Several other drivers need this same
> > cleanup, too.
> > 
> 
> Dumb question: why marking these explicitly as ULL instead of letting
> the compiler do its usual promotion?

even dumbe question, why don't we provide ONE #define
PCI_DMA_MASK_64BIT that does it right.... 
and use that in all needed places
(of course we need a _32BIT one too)

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part