[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <aday6kbt14a.fsf@roland-alpha.cisco.com>
Date:	Wed, 06 Jan 2010 12:44:05 -0800
From:	Roland Dreier <rdreier@...co.com>
To:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Bart Van Assche <bart.vanassche@...il.com>,
	David Dillow <dave@...dillows.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] log2.h: Macro-ize is_power_of_2() for use in BUILD_BUG_ON
 > Perhaps we can avoid worrying about that via
 > #define BUILD_BUG_ON_NOT_POWER_OF_2(n)	\
 > 	BUILD_BUG_ON((n != 0 && ((n & (n - 1)) == 0)))
Having something so specific to this particular case makes me feel like
maybe it's just not worth it.  At least in the case I'm looking at, we
could just have:
/*
 * The code relies on FOO being a power of 2.  If you break this,
 * you're dumb.
 */
#define FOO_SHIFT	6
#define FOO		(1 << FOO_SHIFT)
Your thoughts?
 - R.
--
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
 
