Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 18 May 2005 17:14:43 -0600 | From | Chris Friesen <> | Subject | Re: [patch] time_after_eq fix |
| |
Coywolf Qi Hunt wrote: > Hello, > > The two macros time_after and time_after_eq were added to do wrapping > correctly, but only time_after does it the right way, time_after_eq has > been wrong since the very beginning(v2.1.127, 07-Nov-1998).
> - ((long)(a) - (long)(b) >= 0)) > + ((long)(b) - (long)(a) <= 0))
Why does it matter which way you do it? In what circumstances does your code give a different answer?
Chris - 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/
| |