From: Milind Arun Choudhary <milindchoudhary@gmail.com>
To: Vojtech Pavlik <vojtech@suse.cz>
Cc: Richard Knutsson <ricknu-0@student.ltu.se>,
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 00:41:56 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20070224191001.GA9547@arun.site> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20070224111124.GB3609@suse.cz>
On 12:11 Sat 24 Feb , Vojtech Pavlik wrote:
>
> That would be my only concern - losing compiler warnings.
yes
see
I wanted a single BIT macro which can be used by the whole tree
was looking for a multipurpose one. found it in input.h
so i thought i will put it at a common place
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
now
a> this was written for input user,so they are perfectly happy with it
only change would be now input.h will have
to fetch it from bitops.h..trivial
b> currently almost all other users of BIT are well within the BITS_PER_LONG
limit
c>but it is not sutaible for those who want to go beyond this limit,
as they will not be warned
Now if we have LLBIT which takes care of above case
[& as LLBIT has no wrap it will warn if we go beyond "long long" for
some reason]
So all we need is people to be carefull before passing anything to BIT
& use LLBIT whereever appropriate
so now i think it should be ok to have
#define BIT(nr) (1UL << ((nr) % BITS_PER_LONG))
#define LLBIT(nr) (1ULL << (nr))
thoughts
> > And what about the "1%"?
>
> The 1% will need either LLBIT or an extra % 8.
--
Milind Arun Choudhary
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-02-24 19:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ 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 8:56 ` Richard Knutsson
2007-02-23 10:15 ` Milind Choudhary
2007-02-23 14:10 ` Richard Knutsson
2007-02-23 14:57 ` Dmitry Torokhov
2007-02-23 16:08 ` Richard Knutsson
2007-02-23 17:05 ` Dmitry Torokhov
2007-02-23 18:15 ` Richard Knutsson
2007-02-23 18:37 ` Dmitry Torokhov
2007-02-23 19:11 ` Richard Knutsson
2007-02-23 21:58 ` Dmitry Torokhov
2007-02-23 22:43 ` Richard Knutsson
2007-02-24 11:11 ` Vojtech Pavlik
2007-02-24 12:59 ` Richard Knutsson
2007-02-25 3:39 ` Dmitry Torokhov
2007-02-24 19:11 ` Milind Arun Choudhary [this message]
2007-02-25 15:45 ` Richard Knutsson
2007-02-25 3:37 ` Dmitry Torokhov
2007-02-24 10:46 ` 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=20070224191001.GA9547@arun.site \
--to=milindchoudhary@gmail.com \
--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=ricknu-0@student.ltu.se \
--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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).