All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Richard Knutsson <ricknu-0@student.ltu.se>
To: Milind Arun Choudhary <milindchoudhary@gmail.com>
Cc: Vojtech Pavlik <vojtech@suse.cz>,
	Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com>,
	kernel-janitors@lists.osdl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-input@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz,
	linux-joystick@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz
Subject: Re: [KJ] [RFC][PATCH] BIT macro cleanup
Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2007 15:45:03 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <45E1AEFF.5050202@student.ltu.se> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20070224191001.GA9547@arun.site>

Milind Arun Choudhary wrote:
> why bitops.h? coz BIT qualifies for a "bitop" 
> & bitops.h is  inclued by kernel.h, hence accessible from every part 
> of the tree without mucb efforts
>   
I don't think there is anyone who objects to this
> c>but it is not sutaible for  those who want to go beyond this limit, 
> as they will not be warned 
>   
And this is the reason for this overly long thread :)
> So all we need is  people to be carefull  before passing anything to BIT
>   
This is the difficult thing to do
> so  now i think it should be ok to have
>
> #define BIT(nr) (1UL << ((nr) % BITS_PER_LONG))
> #define LLBIT(nr) (1ULL << (nr))
>
>
> thoughts
>   
Since you guys seems in agreement about the silenced compiler-warnings, 
then I will rest my case.

Richard Knutsson

_______________________________________________
Kernel-janitors mailing list
Kernel-janitors@lists.osdl.org
https://lists.osdl.org/mailman/listinfo/kernel-janitors

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Richard Knutsson <ricknu-0@student.ltu.se>
To: Milind Arun Choudhary <milindchoudhary@gmail.com>
Cc: Vojtech Pavlik <vojtech@suse.cz>,
	Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com>,
	kernel-janitors@lists.osdl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-input@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz,
	linux-joystick@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz
Subject: Re: [KJ][RFC][PATCH] BIT macro cleanup
Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2007 16:45:03 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <45E1AEFF.5050202@student.ltu.se> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20070224191001.GA9547@arun.site>

Milind Arun Choudhary wrote:
> why bitops.h? coz BIT qualifies for a "bitop" 
> & bitops.h is  inclued by kernel.h, hence accessible from every part 
> of the tree without mucb efforts
>   
I don't think there is anyone who objects to this
> c>but it is not sutaible for  those who want to go beyond this limit, 
> as they will not be warned 
>   
And this is the reason for this overly long thread :)
> So all we need is  people to be carefull  before passing anything to BIT
>   
This is the difficult thing to do
> so  now i think it should be ok to have
>
> #define BIT(nr) (1UL << ((nr) % BITS_PER_LONG))
> #define LLBIT(nr) (1ULL << (nr))
>
>
> thoughts
>   
Since you guys seems in agreement about the silenced compiler-warnings, 
then I will rest my case.

Richard Knutsson

  reply	other threads:[~2007-02-25 15:45 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 38+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <3b44d3fb0702222056k1d2a9b57q69a3555a09a9058e@mail.gmail.com>
2007-02-23  8:14 ` [KJ][RFC][PATCH] BIT macro cleanup Milind Choudhary
2007-02-23  8:26   ` [KJ] [RFC][PATCH] " Milind Choudhary
2007-02-23  8:56   ` Richard Knutsson
2007-02-23  8:56     ` [KJ][RFC][PATCH] " Richard Knutsson
2007-02-23 10:15     ` Milind Choudhary
2007-02-23 10:27       ` [KJ] [RFC][PATCH] " Milind Choudhary
2007-02-23 14:10       ` Richard Knutsson
2007-02-23 14:10         ` [KJ][RFC][PATCH] " Richard Knutsson
2007-02-23 14:57         ` [KJ] [RFC][PATCH] " Dmitry Torokhov
2007-02-23 14:57           ` [KJ][RFC][PATCH] " Dmitry Torokhov
2007-02-23 16:08           ` [KJ] [RFC][PATCH] " Richard Knutsson
2007-02-23 16:08             ` [KJ][RFC][PATCH] " Richard Knutsson
2007-02-23 17:05             ` [KJ] [RFC][PATCH] " Dmitry Torokhov
2007-02-23 17:05               ` [KJ][RFC][PATCH] " Dmitry Torokhov
2007-02-23 18:15               ` [KJ] [RFC][PATCH] " Richard Knutsson
2007-02-23 18:15                 ` [KJ][RFC][PATCH] " Richard Knutsson
2007-02-23 18:37                 ` [KJ] [RFC][PATCH] " Dmitry Torokhov
2007-02-23 18:37                   ` [KJ][RFC][PATCH] " Dmitry Torokhov
2007-02-23 19:11                   ` [KJ] [RFC][PATCH] " Richard Knutsson
2007-02-23 19:11                     ` [KJ][RFC][PATCH] " Richard Knutsson
2007-02-23 21:58                     ` [KJ] [RFC][PATCH] " Dmitry Torokhov
2007-02-23 21:58                       ` [KJ][RFC][PATCH] " Dmitry Torokhov
2007-02-23 22:43                       ` [KJ] [RFC][PATCH] " Richard Knutsson
2007-02-23 22:43                         ` [KJ][RFC][PATCH] " Richard Knutsson
2007-02-24 11:11                         ` [KJ] [RFC][PATCH] " Vojtech Pavlik
2007-02-24 11:11                           ` [KJ][RFC][PATCH] " Vojtech Pavlik
2007-02-24 12:59                           ` [KJ] [RFC][PATCH] " Richard Knutsson
2007-02-24 12:59                             ` [KJ][RFC][PATCH] " Richard Knutsson
2007-02-25  3:39                             ` [KJ] [RFC][PATCH] " Dmitry Torokhov
2007-02-25  3:39                               ` [KJ][RFC][PATCH] " Dmitry Torokhov
2007-02-24 19:11                           ` Milind Arun Choudhary
2007-02-24 19:23                             ` [KJ] [RFC][PATCH] " Milind Arun Choudhary
2007-02-25 15:45                             ` Richard Knutsson [this message]
2007-02-25 15:45                               ` [KJ][RFC][PATCH] " Richard Knutsson
2007-02-25  3:37                           ` [KJ] [RFC][PATCH] " Dmitry Torokhov
2007-02-25  3:37                             ` [KJ][RFC][PATCH] " Dmitry Torokhov
2007-02-24 10:46   ` [KJ] [RFC][PATCH] " Vojtech Pavlik
2007-02-24 10:46     ` [KJ][RFC][PATCH] " Vojtech Pavlik

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=45E1AEFF.5050202@student.ltu.se \
    --to=ricknu-0@student.ltu.se \
    --cc=dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com \
    --cc=kernel-janitors@lists.osdl.org \
    --cc=linux-input@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz \
    --cc=linux-joystick@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=milindchoudhary@gmail.com \
    --cc=vojtech@suse.cz \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body. 
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.