Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 23 Mar 2004 02:13:23 -0800 | From | William Lee Irwin III <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] nodemask_t x86_64 changes [5/7] |
| |
On Mon, Mar 22, 2004 at 11:08:50PM -0800, Paul Jackson wrote: > I'll be surprised if the following line works: > nodemask_t node_offline_map = nodes_complement(node_online_map); > 1) Doesn't nodes_complement return void, and work in place? > 2) It might set bits above MAX_NUMNODES, if MAX_NUMNODES isn't a word size multiple. > I am less sure of (2) - the exact details of handling the unused bits of > a bitmask are still confusing me. But this would be one of the very > rare situations that I can find that would actually be sensitive to > possible confusions here - most places don't set bits that aren't > already set in some mask, or are careful to initialize a mask with just > set bits in select positions from 0 to MAX_NUMNODES-1.
In general I attempted to model things after 3-address code. bitmap_complement() is a glaring inconsistency I wouldn't mind seeing shored up with the rest (though I guess it's only got 2 operands).
-- wli - 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/
| |