From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1763885AbXGWQaw (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 Jul 2007 12:30:52 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1759431AbXGWQap (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 Jul 2007 12:30:45 -0400 Received: from ns.suse.de ([195.135.220.2]:42765 "EHLO mx1.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1759488AbXGWQap (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 Jul 2007 12:30:45 -0400 From: Andi Kleen Organization: SUSE Linux Products GmbH, Nuernberg, GF: Markus Rex, HRB 16746 (AG Nuernberg) To: Satyam Sharma Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/8] i386: bitops: Rectify bogus "Ir" constraints Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2007 18:30:40 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.6 Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List , David Howells , Nick Piggin , Andrew Morton , Linus Torvalds , jh@suse.cz References: <20070723160528.22137.84144.sendpatchset@cselinux1.cse.iitk.ac.in> <200707231810.08445.ak@suse.de> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200707231830.40331.ak@suse.de> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > Whoa, thanks for explaining that to me -- I didn't know, obviously. I had > just written a test program that used "Ir" with an automatic variable > defined in the inline function (as is the case with these bitops) and > observed that even when I gave > 32 values, it would still work -- hence > my conclusion. > > However, the patch still stands, does it not? [ I will modify the > changelog, obviously. ] The thing is that we don't want to limit > @nr to <= 31 in the first place, or am I wrong again? :-) These bit operations only allow 8 bit immediates, so 0..255 would be correct. N might work from the 4.1 docs, but I don't know if it works in all old supported gccs (3.2+) However I is definitely not wrong and most bit numbers are small anyways. -Andi