mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Rakib Mullick" <rakib.mullick@gmail.com>
To: "Paul Jackson" <pj@sgi.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cgroup.c: Some 'hlist_head' function fixes.
Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2008 18:12:37 +0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <b9df5fa10808120512wb7f684bgdbcd7ab3f86d25a5@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20080811222942.a7998c43.pj@sgi.com>

On 8/12/08, Paul Jackson <pj@sgi.com> wrote:
> > Is it [text size] the only criteria to judge this patch ?
>
>  No - not the only criteria, as the patch combines a couple of
>  changes.
>
>  > What about the use of "unsigned long", instead of int.
>
>  I had missed that change, even though you had explicitly
>
> described it in your patch comment, when you wrote:
>
>   2. As hash_long returns with unsigned long we need a unsigned long
>
>
> How about just casting the hash_long() result to int:
>
>   index = (int)hash_long(tmp, CSS_SET_HASH_BITS);
 Yes, it looks good.
>
>  Since we are using this 'index' to index an array,
>  it had better fit in an 'int', which indeed it does
>  as CSS_SET_HASH_BITS is 7, which constrains the output
>  of hash_long to [0 .. 2^7-1], that is between 0 and 127.
>
>  However ... looking around the kernel, I see that most other
>  uses of hash_long(), except in cases where the second argument
>  (bit size) might actually exceed 32 bits, either directly
>  index some array with the result, or else assign the result
>  to a temporary 'int'.
>
>  And the compiler does not complain that we're assigning a
>  long to an int.
>
>  So ... what's the problem?
Yes, maybe your right. Ok, I'll go through the code again. If it's
good then I'm happy.
>
>  I see nothing in this patch of value.
>
>  Am I missing something?
>
>  -----
>
>  I just noticed that you had dropped the other recipients
>  from this email thread, a couple of replies ago.  My
>  preference would have been to have this discussion in
>  public.  I prefer not to drop people from CC lists on
>  email threads.
Yes, I've noticed it too. I just forgot to do that. Actually, when I
reply to thread, I just think about that one. This could be a reason
for missing.
Thanks.
>

>
>  --
>
>                   I won't rest till it's the best ...
>                   Programmer, Linux Scalability
>                   Paul Jackson <pj@sgi.com> 1.940.382.4214
>

      parent reply	other threads:[~2008-08-12 12:12 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2008-08-08 15:29 Rakib Mullick
2008-08-09 21:07 ` Paul Jackson
     [not found]   ` <b9df5fa10808100036h35e2c461je9139516f724687@mail.gmail.com>
     [not found]     ` <20080810220816.105d66ea.pj@sgi.com>
     [not found]       ` <b9df5fa10808110202w38930bb3oa492284f1c072f1f@mail.gmail.com>
     [not found]         ` <20080811222942.a7998c43.pj@sgi.com>
2008-08-12 12:12           ` Rakib Mullick [this message]

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=b9df5fa10808120512wb7f684bgdbcd7ab3f86d25a5@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=rakib.mullick@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=pj@sgi.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®