From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Boaz Harrosh Subject: Re: [osd-dev] [PATCH 6/8] exofs: super_operations and file_system_type Date: Wed, 01 Apr 2009 11:05:21 +0300 Message-ID: <49D32041.4090009@panasas.com> References: <49C1331D.1080805@panasas.com> <1237399791-29502-1-git-send-email-bharrosh@panasas.com> <20090331010430.72e8137e.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <49D2665A.9090500@panasas.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Andrew Morton , FUJITA Tomonori , Jeff Garzik , linux-kernel , James Bottomley , Avishay Traeger , open-osd , linux-fsdevel , Evgeniy Polyakov To: Benny Halevy Return-path: Received: from gw-ca.panasas.com ([209.116.51.66]:6676 "EHLO laguna.int.panasas.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754478AbZDAIHZ (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Apr 2009 04:07:25 -0400 In-Reply-To: <49D2665A.9090500@panasas.com> Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 03/31/2009 09:52 PM, Benny Halevy wrote: > On Mar. 31, 2009, 11:04 +0300, Andrew Morton wrote: >> ~0 is signed 0xffffffff. >> >> When assigning to a u64 it gets signed extended to signed >> 0xffffffffffffffff and then converted to unsigned 0xffffffffffffffff. > > Right (I think, I'm not sure in what order) > >> I think. Just as with plain old "-1". Perhaps using plain old "-1" >> would be clearer here. > > or maybe ~0ULL or ~(uint64_t)0 to be extremely anal about it. > > Benny > There is only one right way => ULLONG_MAX. Takes care of the human factor too. (BTW that one is defined (~0ULL)) Thanks Boaz