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 PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2008 10:16:27 +0100 (CET) From: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org> To: Jörn Engel <joern@...fs.org> cc: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>, Pavel Machek <pavel@...e.cz>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC] B+Tree library On Fri, 31 Oct 2008, Jörn Engel wrote: > On Fri, 31 October 2008 07:38:46 +0100, Christian Borntraeger wrote: > > Am Donnerstag, 30. Oktober 2008 schrieb Jörn Engel: > > > Except that min/max in include/linux/kernel.h have some type-safety > > > added. In this particular case that is actually a disadvantage: > > > > So what about min_t and max_t from include/linux/kernel.h? Can that be used? > > Sorry, no. The problems comes from using MAX in structure initializers. > > struct btree_geo btree_geo32 = { > .keylen = 1, > .no_pairs = NODESIZE / sizeof(long) / 2, > }; Where's the MIN/MAX? ;-) Gr{oetje,eeting}s, Geert -- Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@...ux-m68k.org In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that. -- Linus Torvalds
Powered by blists - more mailing lists