lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Sun, 2 Sep 2007 08:56:54 +0800 From: "rae l" <crquan@...il.com> To: "David Newall" <david@...idnewall.com> Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, cr_quan@....com Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] netlink: use the macro min(x,y) provided by <linux/kernel.h> instead On 9/2/07, David Newall <david@...idnewall.com> wrote: > Denis Cheng wrote > > + order = get_bitmask_order(min(max, (unsigned long)UINT_MAX)) - 1; > > > > Why doesn't this clash with the max define, also in linux/kernel.h? They indeed don't clash, the cpp included by gcc is intelligent enough, it know the function-style definition of max in kernel.h, that's different from the auto variable max here, so they don't clash with each other, But I think the variable name "max" here is ambiguous, I changed it to "limit", see my following patch [PATCH 2/3]. -- Denis Cheng - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists