Re: [IDEA+RFC] Possible solution for min()/max() war
Russell King (rmk@arm.linux.org.uk)
Tue, 28 Aug 2001 16:55:13 +0100
On Tue, Aug 28, 2001 at 03:44:53PM +0000, Henning P. Schmiedehausen wrote:
> >I'll show you a real example from drivers/acorn/scsi/acornscsi.c:
> > min(host->scsi.SCp.this_residual, DMAC_BUFFER_SIZE / 2);
>
> >this_residual is "int", and "DMAC_BUFFER_SIZE" is just a #define for
> >an integer constant. So the above is actually a signed comparison, and
> >I'll bet you that was not what the author intended.
>
> And the mistake of the author was not to write "unsigned int this_residual".
> That's the bug. Not the min() function.
Hmm, everyone's talking about my code. And I agree with Henning that
"this_residual" should be unsigned. Unfortunately, it's defined in the
generic SCSI layer. I'd really like it to be fixed in the SCSI layer
no matter what the outcome of the min/max debarcle^wdebate is.
--
Russell King (rmk@arm.linux.org.uk) The developer of ARM Linux
http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/personal/aboutme.html
-
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/