On Sun, Aug 04, 2013 at 01:23:13PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 4, 2013 at 1:20 PM, Paul E. McKenney
> wrote:
> >
> > I have it queued up for 3.12, as you say, due to "-fno-strict-overflow".
> > But if you would rather have it sooner, please let me know and I will send
> > a pull req
On Sun, Aug 4, 2013 at 1:20 PM, Paul E. McKenney
wrote:
>
> I have it queued up for 3.12, as you say, due to "-fno-strict-overflow".
> But if you would rather have it sooner, please let me know and I will send
> a pull request.
No, that's fine. As long as it's somewhere. 3.12 is better, rc4 is
al
On Sun, Aug 04, 2013 at 12:16:02PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 7:28 AM, Paul E. McKenney
> wrote:
> >>
> >> Ahh, there's an error in the commit message (it says signed to unsigned).
> >
> > Good catch, fixed!
>
> .. so I ended up waiting for that fixed version due to th
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 7:28 AM, Paul E. McKenney
wrote:
>>
>> Ahh, there's an error in the commit message (it says signed to unsigned).
>
> Good catch, fixed!
.. so I ended up waiting for that fixed version due to this email, but
it never came. Should I just apply the original and re-fix it myse
On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 12:01:03AM +1000, Kevin Easton wrote:
> Quoting "Paul E. McKenney" :
>
> >On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 03:30:35PM +1000, c...@guarana.org wrote:
> >>Quoting "Paul E. McKenney" :
> >>
> ...
> >>>
> >>>Note that the C standard considers the cast from signed to
> >>>unsigned to be
Quoting "Paul E. McKenney" :
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 03:30:35PM +1000, c...@guarana.org wrote:
Quoting "Paul E. McKenney" :
...
>
>Note that the C standard considers the cast from signed to
>unsigned to be implementation-defined, see 6.3.1.3p3.
...
Don't worry, the case from signed to uns
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 03:30:35PM +1000, c...@guarana.org wrote:
> Quoting "Paul E. McKenney" :
>
> >According to the C standard 3.4.3p3, overflow of a signed integer results
> >in undefined behavior. This commit therefore changes the definitions
> >of time_after() and time_after_eq() to avoid t
Quoting "Paul E. McKenney" :
According to the C standard 3.4.3p3, overflow of a signed integer results
in undefined behavior. This commit therefore changes the definitions
of time_after() and time_after_eq() to avoid this undefined behavior.
The trick is that the subtraction is done using unsig
On Sun, Jul 28, 2013 at 11:46:59AM -0700, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> On Sat, 2013-07-27 at 15:58 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > According to the C standard 3.4.3p3, overflow of a signed integer results
> > in undefined behavior. This commit therefore changes the definitions
> > of time_after() and
On Sat, 2013-07-27 at 15:58 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> According to the C standard 3.4.3p3, overflow of a signed integer results
> in undefined behavior. This commit therefore changes the definitions
> of time_after() and time_after_eq() to avoid this undefined behavior.
> The trick is that
According to the C standard 3.4.3p3, overflow of a signed integer results
in undefined behavior. This commit therefore changes the definitions
of time_after() and time_after_eq() to avoid this undefined behavior.
The trick is that the subtraction is done using unsigned arithmetic,
which according
11 matches
Mail list logo