![]() | ||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
On Tue, 13 May 2008 14:43:43 +0400 Nickolay Vinogradov <nickolay@protei.ru> wrote: > Andrew Morton __________:> > On Sun, 04 May 2008 22:58:50 +0400> > ____________________ ______________ ____________________ <nickolay@protei.ru> wrote: > > > >> bugfix in fls64 on a big endian systems(against 2.6.25). > >>> >> Signed-off-by: Nickolay Vinogradov <nickolay@protei.ru> > >> > >> -- > >> > >> diff --git a/include/asm-generic/bitops/fls64.h > >> b/include/asm-generic/bitops/fls64.h > >> index 1b6b17c..2eedb6f 100644 > >> --- a/include/asm-generic/bitops/fls64.h > >> +++ b/include/asm-generic/bitops/fls64.h > >> @@ -8,7 +8,7 @@ static inline int fls64(__u64 x) > >> __u32 h = x >> 32; > >> if (h) > >> return fls(h) + 32; > >> - return fls(x); > >> + return fls((__u32)x); > >> } > >> > >> #endif /* _ASM_GENERIC_BITOPS_FLS64_H_ */ > > > > Please describe the bug which you are fixing? > > > > Perhaps a more robust fix to <whatever the bug is> would be to > > repair fls() so that it works correctly when passed a u64. Perhaps.> > Repair fls64() so that it works correctly when passed a u64. > Yes, but what's wrong with it now? The fls() in include/asm-generic/bitops/fls.h takes an int. The fls() in include/asm-x86/bitops.h takes an int. So both of these will already trucate the incoming argument to 32-bits. It seems that you are using a version of fls() which doesn't do this. Why? Which architecture are you using? Would it not be more robust to fix fls()? -- 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: 2008-05-13 17:35 [W:0.260 / U:1.260 seconds] ©2003-2008 Jasper Spaans | ||||||||||