From owner-cvs-all Wed Jan 10 22:24:55 2001 Delivered-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org Received: from feral.com (feral.com [192.67.166.1]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 51B8337B401; Wed, 10 Jan 2001 22:24:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from beppo (beppo [192.67.166.79]) by feral.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id WAA18966; Wed, 10 Jan 2001 22:24:26 -0800 Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2001 22:24:26 -0800 (PST) From: Matthew Jacob Reply-To: mjacob@feral.com To: Peter Jeremy Cc: Warner Losh , Matt Jacob , cvs-committers@FreeBSD.ORG, cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/alpha/include bus.h In-Reply-To: <20010111163029.B91242@gsmx07.alcatel.com.au> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Why isn't it a valid test? This is exactly the test case that Warner was worrying about? On Thu, 11 Jan 2001, Peter Jeremy wrote: > On 2001-Jan-09 22:04:03 -0800, Matthew Jacob wrote: > > > > > >> In message <200101091817.f09IHng10622@freefall.freebsd.org> Matt Jacob writes: > >> : me that BUS_SPACE_UNRESTRICTED should b ~0UL, not ~0. > >> > >> Would this impact the 10E6 uses of ~0 in the bus_alloc_resource calls > >> we have? > > > >int foo() > >{ > > bar(~0); > >} > >int zoo() > >{ > > bar1(~0UL); > >} > ... > >Sorta looks the same to me.... > > I don't think that's a valid test. A more reasonable test would be > something like > > unsigned long foo, bar; > > fun() > { > foo = bar & ~0; > } > > Unfortunately, I don't have a functional FreeBSD/Alpha box right now, > but both Compaq CC and gcc-2.8.1 generate "foo = bar". I'm not sure > that this behaviour makes sense. > > Peter > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message