Messages in this thread Patch in this message | | | From | "Fred Reimer" <> | Subject | Re: ia64: Patch 2.3.4pre1 looks fishy | Date | Sat, 29 May 1999 18:01:19 -0400 |
| |
----- Original Message ----- From: Horst von Brand <vonbrand@sleipnir.valparaiso.cl> To: David Mosberger-Tang <davidm@hpl.hp.com> Cc: <linux-kernel@vger.rutgers.edu> Sent: Thursday, May 27, 1999 3:27 PM Subject: ia64: Patch 2.3.4pre1 looks fishy
> I have no idea what is going on here, but this doesn't look right: > > diff -u --recursive --new-file v2.3.3/linux/fs/open.c linux/fs/open.c > --- v2.3.3/linux/fs/open.c Fri Apr 16 14:21:39 1999 > +++ linux/fs/open.c Mon May 24 22:47:43 1999 > @@ -171,7 +171,7 @@ > return error; > } > > -#ifndef __alpha__ > +#if !(defined(__alpha__) || defined(__ia64__)) > > /* > * sys_utime() can be implemented in user-level using sys_utimes(). > > The last #if is supposed to match if __alpha__ is not defined, but __ia64__ > is. This is absurd, AFAIU they can't ever be both defined.
I read: #if !(defined(__alpha__) || defined(__ia64__))
to mean "If neither __alpha__ nor __ia64__ is defined then..." Note the parenthesis location. This kind of makes sense to me, it would indicate that 32 bit specific (or non 64-bit safe) code can follow. Perhaps there should be another || for 64-bit sparc code? I don't see what is absurd. True they can't ever both be defined, but they can both be NOT defined...
fwr
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |