Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 30 Mar 2005 01:58:57 +0400 | From | Michael Tokarev <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] embarassing typo |
| |
Måns Rullgård wrote: > "Ronald S. Bultje" <rbultje@ronald.bitfreak.net> writes: > >>--- linux-2.6.5/drivers/media/video/zr36050.c.old 16 Sep 2004 22:53:27 -0000 1.2 >>+++ linux-2.6.5/drivers/media/video/zr36050.c 29 Mar 2005 20:30:23 -0000 >>@@ -419,7 +419,7 @@ >> dri_data[2] = 0x00; >> dri_data[3] = 0x04; >> dri_data[4] = ptr->dri >> 8; >>- dri_data[5] = ptr->dri * 0xff; >>+ dri_data[5] = ptr->dri & 0xff; > > Hey, that's a nice obfuscation of a simple negation.
It's not a negation. This statement always assigns zero to dri_data[5] if dri_data is char[]. Looks like gcc isn't catching this problem.
> BTW, when assigning to a char type, is the masking really necessary at > all? I can't see that it should make a difference. Am I missing > something subtle?
Well, it's a matter of readability mostly. For now at least, when char is always 8 bytes...
/mjt - 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/
| |