On 10/30/2016 10:51 AM, André Przywara wrote:
> On 29/10/16 18:42, Marek Vasut wrote:
>> On 10/29/2016 02:50 PM, Hans de Goede wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> On 21-10-16 03:24, Andre Przywara wrote:
OHCI has a known limitation of allowing only 32-bit DMA buffer
addresses, so we have a lot of u32
On 29/10/16 18:42, Marek Vasut wrote:
> On 10/29/2016 02:50 PM, Hans de Goede wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On 21-10-16 03:24, Andre Przywara wrote:
>>> OHCI has a known limitation of allowing only 32-bit DMA buffer
>>> addresses, so we have a lot of u32 variables around, which are assigned
>>> to pointers
On 10/29/2016 02:50 PM, Hans de Goede wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 21-10-16 03:24, Andre Przywara wrote:
>> OHCI has a known limitation of allowing only 32-bit DMA buffer
>> addresses, so we have a lot of u32 variables around, which are assigned
>> to pointers and vice versa. This obviously creates issues
Hi,
On 21-10-16 03:24, Andre Przywara wrote:
OHCI has a known limitation of allowing only 32-bit DMA buffer
addresses, so we have a lot of u32 variables around, which are assigned
to pointers and vice versa. This obviously creates issues with 64-bit
systems, so the compiler complains here and
