From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Eddie Kohler Date: Thu, 04 Jan 2007 21:49:28 +0000 Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5]: DCCP Fix use of invalid loss intervals Message-Id: <459D7668.4050602@cs.ucla.edu> List-Id: References: <200612201544.22122.ian.mcdonald@jandi.co.nz> In-Reply-To: <200612201544.22122.ian.mcdonald@jandi.co.nz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: dccp@vger.kernel.org Ian (catching up slowly slowly), here is a nit as nitty as they come. This diff seems strange to me, since ~ actually does the same thing on integers and unsigned integers. (This code: printf("%u %u\n", ~0, ~0U); will print the same thing twice.) Perhaps dccplih_interval is a 64-bit number? In which case you want to say something like ~0ULL? Eddie Ian McDonald wrote: > I've been trying to fix up performance for CCID3 and found this little > bug that means the comparison was invalid and we were using invalid loss > intervals when we shouldn't of. > > Signed-off-by: Ian McDonald > --- > diff --git a/net/dccp/ccids/lib/loss_interval.c b/net/dccp/ccids/lib/loss_interval.c > index 0a0baef..372d7e7 100644 > --- a/net/dccp/ccids/lib/loss_interval.c > +++ b/net/dccp/ccids/lib/loss_interval.c > @@ -91,7 +91,7 @@ u32 dccp_li_hist_calc_i_mean(struct list_head *list) > u32 w_tot = 0; > > list_for_each_entry_safe(li_entry, li_next, list, dccplih_node) { > - if (li_entry->dccplih_interval != ~0) { > + if (li_entry->dccplih_interval != ~0U) { > i_tot0 += li_entry->dccplih_interval * dccp_li_hist_w[i]; > w_tot += dccp_li_hist_w[i]; > if (i != 0) > - > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe dccp" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html