[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0611261415530.3483@woody.osdl.org>
Date: Sun, 26 Nov 2006 14:20:10 -0800 (PST)
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...l.org>
To: Roland Dreier <rdreier@...co.com>
cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, openib-general@...nib.org,
tom@...ngridcomputing.com, Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Avoid truncating to 'long' in ALIGN() macro
On Sun, 26 Nov 2006, Roland Dreier wrote:
>
> > +#define ALIGN(x,a) __ALIGN_MASK(x,(typeof(x))(a)-1)
> > +#define __ALIGN_MASK(x,mask) (((x)+(mask))&~(mask))
>
> Fine by me, but it loses the extra (typeof(x)) cast that Al wanted to
> make sure that the result of ALIGN() is not wider than x.
Well, since "mask" is now made to be of the same type as "x", every
sub-expression actually has the same type, modulo the normal C behaviour
of "expand to at least "int".
So arguably, the result is _more_ like a normal C operation this way.
Type-wise, the "ALIGN()" macro acts like any other C operation (ie if you
feed it an "unsigned char", the end result is an "int" due to the normal C
type widening that happens for all C operations).
But I don't care horribly much. Al may have some other reasons to _not_
want the normal C type expansion to happen (ie maybe he does something
unnatural with sparse ;)
Linus
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists