On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 10:58 AM Nathan Chancellor <natechancellor@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 10:43:06AM -0800, Nick Desaulniers wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 20, 2020 at 11:00 AM Nathan Chancellor > > <natechancellor@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > -#if QLA_64BIT_PTR > > > +#ifdef QLA_64BIT_PTR > > > > Thomas should test this, as it implies the previous patch was NEVER > > using the "true case" values, making it in effect a > > no-functional-change (NFC). > > QLA_64BIT_PTR is defined to 1 when CONFIG_ARCH_DMA_ADDR_T_64BIT is set > so the true should have always worked, unless I am misunderstanding what > you are saying. The false case should have also worked because it is > still evaluated to 0 but it throws the warning to make sure that was > intended (again, as I understand it). > > > > #define LOAD_CMD MBC_LOAD_RAM_A64_ROM > > > #define DUMP_CMD MBC_DUMP_RAM_A64_ROM > > > #define CMD_ARGS (BIT_7 | BIT_6 | BIT_4 | BIT_3 | BIT_2 | BIT_1 | BIT_0) Ah, right, so either QLA_64BIT_PTR is defined with a value of 1, or not defined at all. My bad. -- Thanks, ~Nick Desaulniers
