![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
On Wed, 2 Apr 2003, CaT wrote: > > > > Hardly, it'll overflow in even more cases > > than CaT's (si.totalram << PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT). > > Yes. I had it initially as Xavier suggested but after thinking about it > a bit I felt that making the value smaller and -then- bigger was safer. > > > I'll take a look at this later, not right now. > > It is still an unsigned long long int so (AFAIK) it wont overflow till > it hits 18,446,744,073,709,551,615. Now... if you have that much ram... > wow! :) There's plenty of room in unsigned long long size, yes, but si.totalram is only an unsigned long, so the arithmetic as you have it starts out overflowing an unsigned long. I don't know yet what it should say: RH2.96-110 is getting confused by the do_div(size, 100) I have there (to respect Xavier's point), and this is definitely _not_ worth adding a compiler dependency for. Hugh - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ | ||||||||||||
| Last update: 2005-03-22 12:34 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||||