thanks... I'm wondering if there's a consensus among kernel hackers about changes like:
> - if (hdr.cmd < 0 || hdr.cmd >= ARRAY_SIZE(ucma_cmd_table)) > + if (hdr.cmd >= ARRAY_SIZE(ucma_cmd_table)) > return -EINVAL; I understand that new gcc sees that hdr.cmd is unsigned and hence can't be < 0, and generates a warning for that, and having a build cluttered with warnings hides bugs and so on. However the code here looks quite sensible to me -- otherwise we end up with missing range checking if hdr.cmd ever changes to a signed type. This seems like a good way to introduce bugs: delete valid range checking code to shut up a silly gcc warning, and then change the type of a variable. Can't we just make gcc shut up about the comparison and generate no code for it because it knows it can't be true? - R. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
