Re: [PATCH] Remove pointless <0 comparison for unsigned variable in fs/fcntl.c
From: Jesper Juhl (juhl-lkml_at_dif.dk)
Date: 11/24/04
- Previous message: Lee Revell: "Re: bug in mm/slab.c"
- In reply to: Timur Tabi: "Re: [PATCH] Remove pointless <0 comparison for unsigned variable in fs/fcntl.c"
- Next in thread: Timur Tabi: "Re: [PATCH] Remove pointless <0 comparison for unsigned variable in fs/fcntl.c"
- Reply: Timur Tabi: "Re: [PATCH] Remove pointless <0 comparison for unsigned variable in fs/fcntl.c"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 00:09:59 +0100 (CET) To: Timur Tabi <timur.tabi@ammasso.com>
On Tue, 23 Nov 2004, Timur Tabi wrote:
> Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> > which might warn on an architecture where "pid_t" is just sixteen bits wide.
> > Does that make the code wrong? Hell no.
>
> Wouldn't something like "sizeof(pid_t) > 2" be a better test? It certainly
> would be a lot easier to understand than comparing with 0xffff.
>
That was not the point of the example Linus gave.
The example Linus gave was a function taking a pid_t argument and then
comparing the value of the argument passed against 0xffff - the /value/ of
the pid_t argument passed, not the size of the datatype.
int fn(pid_t a)
{
if (a > 0xffff)
...
}
if pid_t is 16 bit, then the value can never be greater than 0xffff but,
if pid_t is greater than 16 bit, say 32 bit, then the argument "a" could
very well contain a value greater than 0xffff and then the comparison
makes perfect sense. So, while you'd get a warning on architectures where
pid_t is 16bit or less you won't get a warning when pid_t is greater than
16 bit. "fixing" that warning would clearly be wrong, no argument about
that.
-- Jesper Juhl - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- Previous message: Lee Revell: "Re: bug in mm/slab.c"
- In reply to: Timur Tabi: "Re: [PATCH] Remove pointless <0 comparison for unsigned variable in fs/fcntl.c"
- Next in thread: Timur Tabi: "Re: [PATCH] Remove pointless <0 comparison for unsigned variable in fs/fcntl.c"
- Reply: Timur Tabi: "Re: [PATCH] Remove pointless <0 comparison for unsigned variable in fs/fcntl.c"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|