[lkml]   [2004]   [Nov]   [23]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH] Remove pointless <0 comparison for unsigned variable in fs/fcntl.c
On Tue, 23 Nov 2004, Timur Tabi wrote:

> Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > which might warn on an architecture where "pid_t" is just sixteen bits wide.
> > Does that make the code wrong? Hell no.
> Wouldn't something like "sizeof(pid_t) > 2" be a better test? It certainly
> would be a lot easier to understand than comparing with 0xffff.
That was not the point of the example Linus gave.
The example Linus gave was a function taking a pid_t argument and then
comparing the value of the argument passed against 0xffff - the /value/ of
the pid_t argument passed, not the size of the datatype.

int fn(pid_t a)
if (a > 0xffff)

if pid_t is 16 bit, then the value can never be greater than 0xffff but,
if pid_t is greater than 16 bit, say 32 bit, then the argument "a" could
very well contain a value greater than 0xffff and then the comparison
makes perfect sense. So, while you'd get a warning on architectures where
pid_t is 16bit or less you won't get a warning when pid_t is greater than
16 bit. "fixing" that warning would clearly be wrong, no argument about

Jesper Juhl

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 14:08    [W:0.050 / U:4.648 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site