On 04/16/2015 11:26 PM, Alexandre Courbot wrote:
Looks good, but I think I would definitely prefer this to be a mask instead of a bit index, i.e:r->offset &= ~(priv->iommu_addr_mask >> priv->iommu_pgshift); and r->offset |= (priv->iommu_addr_mask >> priv->iommu_pgshift);
Wouldn't that be just a more complicated way of expressing the same thing? _______________________________________________ Nouveau mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/nouveau
