linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/3] netlink: use the macro min(x,y) provided by <linux/kernel.h> instead

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <91b13c310709011756n40ca15fao55d88d3754f0c292@mail.gmail.com>
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 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/