[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <200812081650.35014.rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Date: Mon, 8 Dec 2008 16:50:34 +1030
From: Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>
To: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Russell King <rmk+lkml@....linux.org.uk>,
Haavard Skinnemoen <hskinnemoen@...el.com>,
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
Linux Kernel Development <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"Linux/m68k" <linux-m68k@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Yet more ARM breakage in linux-next
On Monday 08 December 2008 08:20:59 Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> On Fri, 5 Dec 2008, Rusty Russell wrote:
> > +static inline int __fls(int x)
> ^^^ ^^^
> Other implementations take `unsigned long' and return `unsigned long'...
It's all over the place, actually. 32 bit archs are especially loose.
I've been toying with the idea of a boottime testsuite for all the
bitops to see who gets them wrong.
> > +static inline int __fls(unsigned long word)
> ^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> > +{
> > + return fls(word) - 1;
> > +}
> > +
>
> ... but this one uses mixed types?
I cut and pasted. I thought you were 32 bit, so doesn't matter?
> What are the official semantics of __fls()?
Find last bit set in the word, undefined if word is 0. Returns 0
to BITS_PER_LONG-1.
Cheers,
Rusty.
--
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