On 23.11.2010 00:07, Artem Belevich wrote:
While it's not directly related to hunting for '&'/'&&' typos, here's
another seemingly wrong place in the code:
--- a/sys/dev/ahci/ahci.c
+++ b/sys/dev/ahci/ahci.c
@@ -852,7 +852,7 @@ ahci_ch_attach(device_t dev)
ch->caps = ctlr->caps;
While it's not directly related to hunting for '&'/'&&' typos, here's
another seemingly wrong place in the code:
--- a/sys/dev/ahci/ahci.c
+++ b/sys/dev/ahci/ahci.c
@@ -852,7 +852,7 @@ ahci_ch_attach(device_t dev)
ch->caps = ctlr->caps;
ch->caps2 = ctlr->caps2;
ch->quirks =
On Mon, 22 Nov 2010 10:48:09 -0800
Artem Belevich wrote:
> hdr.elf.e_ident[EI_OSABI] is not a bitmask and '==' should've been
> used instead. Now ldd.c has two instances of this bug due to
> copy/pasting of orignal code.
Fixed in r215705. Thanks!
--
Bruce Cran
__
There's another case of '&' used improperly.
http://svn.freebsd.org/viewvc/base?view=revision&revision=90385
if (hdr.elf.e_ident[EI_OSABI] & ELFOSABI_FREEBSD) {
is_shlib = 1;
} else {
hdr.elf.e_ident[EI_OSABI] is not a bitmask and '==' should've been used instead.
Now ldd.c has
On Mon Nov 22 10, Bruce Cran wrote:
> I've been going through src/bin and src/sbin seeing how easy it would
> be to remove warnings clang generates. During the work I came
> across routed/parms.c which appears to be doing a logical instead of
> bitwise AND. Would the following change be correct?
l
I've been going through src/bin and src/sbin seeing how easy it would
be to remove warnings clang generates. During the work I came
across routed/parms.c which appears to be doing a logical instead of
bitwise AND. Would the following change be correct?
Index: /usr/src/head/sbin/routed/parms.c
6 matches
Mail list logo