[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0701300753170.23302@CPE00045a9c397f-CM001225dbafb6>
Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2007 07:56:20 -0500 (EST)
From: "Robert P. J. Day" <rpjday@...dspring.com>
To: Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@...oo.com.au>
cc: Linux kernel mailing list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>, dhowells@...hat.com,
galak@...nel.crashing.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add "is_power_of_2" checking to log2.h.
On Tue, 30 Jan 2007, Nick Piggin wrote:
> Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> > Add the inline function "is_power_of_2()" to log2.h, where the value
> > zero is *not* considered to be a power of two.
>
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Robert P. J. Day <rpjday@...dspring.com>
> >
> > /*
> > + * Determine whether some value is a power of two, where zero is
> > + * *not* considered a power of two.
> > + */
>
> Why the qualifier? Zero *is* not a power of 2, is it?
no, but it bears repeating since some developers might think it *is*.
if you peruse the current kernel code, you'll find some tests of the
simpler form:
((n & (n - 1)) == 0))
which is clearly testing for "power of twoness" but which will return
true for a value of zero. that's wrong, and it's why it's emphasized
in the comment.
rday
--
========================================================================
Robert P. J. Day
Linux Consulting, Training and Annoying Kernel Pedantry
Waterloo, Ontario, CANADA
http://www.fsdev.dreamhosters.com/wiki/index.php?title=Main_Page
========================================================================
-
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