From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: "Jan Beulich" <jbeulich@novell.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: fix
	variable_test_bit()asmconstraints
Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2008 14:11:18 +0000
Message-ID: <47DA9596.76E4.0078.0@novell.com>
References: <47DA90EE.76E4.0078.0@novell.com>
	<C40034C8.15036%keir.fraser@eu.citrix.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com>
In-Reply-To: <C40034C8.15036%keir.fraser@eu.citrix.com>
Content-Disposition: inline
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-Help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com
Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com
To: Keir Fraser <keir.fraser@eu.citrix.com>, xen-devel@lists.xensource.com
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

>Regarding your other reply: I would actually be happy to change the =
bitops
>to work with longs only. I suspect, and would need to have demonstrated
>otherwise, that supporting bitops on arbitrary-width fields down to the
>instruction level is not really worthwhile. Either way, I accept that =
what
>we do now is dubious at best.

Hmm, change it to work with longs only but also make it work without
casts? You mean then change all places where bitops are applied to
exclusively use 'unsigned long' as the fundamental type? I didn't look
at the number of places that would require changing, but I'm afraid it'd
be quite a few (and it might get you further away from Linux originals
in some cases).

Jan