On Wed, Nov 29, 2000 at 09:23:40PM -0500, Andrew Gallatin wrote:
>
> Bernd Walter writes:
> > Just to be clear the values given to lca_read_config were:
> > b=0, s=20, f=0, reg=0, width=4
> > That means b in LCA_CFGOFF is false and the second formular will be applied.
> > The first part is 1<<n while n is calculated to be 31 in our case and
> > this makes -1 for int - your theory seems to be right.
> > But are you shure that changing our variables to unsigned will help?
> > Don't we need to make '1' unsigned?
>
> I thought so at first too, but it was never unsigned and it worked
> until recently.. And the same fix fixes a nearly identical panic on
> another platform, so I'm betting this is it ;)
Just another point:
We don't have a negative value but still an overflow with s=21 to s=31.
>From my understanding we really should have a 64 bit value to get acurate
results.
--
B.Walter COSMO-Project http://www.cosmo-project.de
[EMAIL PROTECTED] Usergroup [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
