On 09/03/2025 at 19:23, David Laight wrote:
> On Sun, 9 Mar 2025 01:58:53 +
> David Laight wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 7 Mar 2025 18:58:08 +0900
>> Vincent Mailhol wrote:
>>
>>> On 07/03/2025 at 04:23, David Laight wrote:
On Thu, 06 Mar 2025 20:29:52 +0900
Vincent Mailhol via B4 Relay
>
On Sun, 9 Mar 2025 01:58:53 +
David Laight wrote:
> On Fri, 7 Mar 2025 18:58:08 +0900
> Vincent Mailhol wrote:
>
> > On 07/03/2025 at 04:23, David Laight wrote:
> > > On Thu, 06 Mar 2025 20:29:52 +0900
> > > Vincent Mailhol via B4 Relay
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > >> From: Vincent Mailh
On Fri, 7 Mar 2025 18:58:08 +0900
Vincent Mailhol wrote:
> On 07/03/2025 at 04:23, David Laight wrote:
> > On Thu, 06 Mar 2025 20:29:52 +0900
> > Vincent Mailhol via B4 Relay
> > wrote:
> >
> >> From: Vincent Mailhol
> >>
> >> In an upcoming change, GENMASK() and its friends will indirectly
On Fri, 7 Mar 2025 18:58:08 +0900
Vincent Mailhol wrote:
> On 07/03/2025 at 04:23, David Laight wrote:
> > On Thu, 06 Mar 2025 20:29:52 +0900
> > Vincent Mailhol via B4 Relay
> > wrote:
> >
> >> From: Vincent Mailhol
> >>
> >> In an upcoming change, GENMASK() and its friends will indirectly
On 07/03/2025 at 22:27, David Laight wrote:
> On Fri, 7 Mar 2025 18:58:08 +0900
> Vincent Mailhol wrote:
>
>> On 07/03/2025 at 04:23, David Laight wrote:
>>> On Thu, 06 Mar 2025 20:29:52 +0900
>>> Vincent Mailhol via B4 Relay
>>> wrote:
>>>
From: Vincent Mailhol
(...)
+#define G
On Thu, 06 Mar 2025 20:29:52 +0900
Vincent Mailhol via B4 Relay
wrote:
> From: Vincent Mailhol
>
> In an upcoming change, GENMASK() and its friends will indirectly
> depend on sizeof() which is not available in asm.
>
> Instead of adding further complexity to __GENMASK() to make it work
> for
On 06/03/2025 at 22:05, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 06, 2025 at 08:29:52PM +0900, Vincent Mailhol via B4 Relay wrote:
>> From: Vincent Mailhol
>>
>> In an upcoming change, GENMASK() and its friends will indirectly
>> depend on sizeof() which is not available in asm.
>>
>> Instead of addin
From: Vincent Mailhol
In an upcoming change, GENMASK() and its friends will indirectly
depend on sizeof() which is not available in asm.
Instead of adding further complexity to __GENMASK() to make it work
for both asm and non asm, just split the definition of the two
variants.
Signed-off-by: Vi
On 06/03/2025 at 23:34, Lucas De Marchi wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 06, 2025 at 08:29:52PM +0900, Vincent Mailhol via B4 Relay
> wrote:
(...)
> it seems we now have 1 inconsistency that we comment why
> GENMASK_U128() is not available in asm, but we don't comment why
> GENMASK_INPUT_CHECK() is not avail
On 07/03/2025 at 04:23, David Laight wrote:
> On Thu, 06 Mar 2025 20:29:52 +0900
> Vincent Mailhol via B4 Relay
> wrote:
>
>> From: Vincent Mailhol
>>
>> In an upcoming change, GENMASK() and its friends will indirectly
>> depend on sizeof() which is not available in asm.
>>
>> Instead of adding
On Fri, Mar 07, 2025 at 12:07:45AM +0900, Vincent Mailhol wrote:
> On 06/03/2025 at 22:05, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 06, 2025 at 08:29:52PM +0900, Vincent Mailhol via B4 Relay
> > wrote:
> >> From: Vincent Mailhol
...
> >> -/*
> >> - * BUILD_BUG_ON_ZERO is not available in h files
On Thu, Mar 06, 2025 at 08:29:52PM +0900, Vincent Mailhol via B4 Relay wrote:
From: Vincent Mailhol
In an upcoming change, GENMASK() and its friends will indirectly
depend on sizeof() which is not available in asm.
Instead of adding further complexity to __GENMASK() to make it work
for both as
On Thu, Mar 06, 2025 at 08:29:52PM +0900, Vincent Mailhol via B4 Relay wrote:
> From: Vincent Mailhol
>
> In an upcoming change, GENMASK() and its friends will indirectly
> depend on sizeof() which is not available in asm.
>
> Instead of adding further complexity to __GENMASK() to make it work
>
13 matches
Mail list logo
