Re: [PATCH 03/10] setexpr: Add explicit support for 32- and 64-bit ints

2020-12-02 Thread Tom Rini
On Sun, Nov 01, 2020 at 02:15:37PM -0700, Simon Glass wrote: > At present this function assumes that a size of 4 refers to a ulong. This > is true on 32-bit machines but not commonly on 64-bit machines. > > This means that the 'l' specify does not work correctly with setexpr. > > Add an

[PATCH 03/10] setexpr: Add explicit support for 32- and 64-bit ints

2020-11-01 Thread Simon Glass
At present this function assumes that a size of 4 refers to a ulong. This is true on 32-bit machines but not commonly on 64-bit machines. This means that the 'l' specify does not work correctly with setexpr. Add an explicit case for 32-bit values so that 64-bit machines can still use the 'l'