From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753733AbZBAJ7q (ORCPT ); Sun, 1 Feb 2009 04:59:46 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752691AbZBAJ7f (ORCPT ); Sun, 1 Feb 2009 04:59:35 -0500 Received: from 74-93-104-97-Washington.hfc.comcastbusiness.net ([74.93.104.97]:47429 "EHLO sunset.davemloft.net" rhost-flags-OK-FAIL-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752430AbZBAJ7e (ORCPT ); Sun, 1 Feb 2009 04:59:34 -0500 Date: Sun, 01 Feb 2009 01:59:31 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <20090201.015931.127677783.davem@davemloft.net> To: roel.kluin@gmail.com Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] sungem: limit reaches -1, but 0 tested From: David Miller In-Reply-To: <4984473C.1040508@gmail.com> References: <4984473C.1040508@gmail.com> X-Mailer: Mew version 6.1 on Emacs 22.1 / Mule 5.0 (SAKAKI) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org From: Roel Kluin Date: Sat, 31 Jan 2009 13:42:36 +0100 > With a postfix decrement these reach -1 rather than 0, > but after the loop it is tested to have become 0. > > Signed-off-by: Roel Kluin Just like the case just pointed out in your 'net' version of this patch, it is being tested "<= 0" so this fix is not necessary at all. Please carefully review all of your changes of this kind to make sure the test is strictly equality to zero rather than <= 0. I'm dropping all of these postfix decrement patches.