Date: Tue, 9 Jun 2009 07:42:24 +0000 (UTC) From: "Bjoern A. Zeeb" <bzeeb-lists@lists.zabbadoz.net> To: d@delphij.net Cc: Hiroki Sato <hrs@FreeBSD.org>, rea-fbsd@codelabs.ru, FreeBSD Current <current@freebsd.org>, net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [head tinderbox] failure on sparc64/sparc64 Message-ID: <20090609074144.O22887@maildrop.int.zabbadoz.net> In-Reply-To: <4A2E0D12.40101@delphij.net> References: <20090608224516.547F17302F@freebsd-current.sentex.ca> <4A2DA390.3090704@delphij.net> <pnDviOUhM/SNuybQq0u/UHsbVeU@j4OYE6OL8eALCd4BvSxIfwgoxSc> <E1MDvQt-000CEr-B0@kabab.cs.huji.ac.il> <4A2E0D12.40101@delphij.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, 9 Jun 2009, Xin LI wrote: > Danny Braniss wrote: >>> Xin, good day. >>> >>> Mon, Jun 08, 2009 at 04:49:36PM -0700, Xin LI wrote: >>>> The attached patch should fix this, any objections? >>> Yes, you missed negation operator in the copyin check. The issue >>> was already fixed by hrs@ two hours ago: >>> http://svn.freebsd.org/viewvc/base?view=revision&revision=193796 >> sorry to barge in, but: >> if ((options | GIF_FULLOPTS) == GIF_FULLOPTS) >> is not clear, >> if ((options & ~GIF_FULLOPTS) == 0) >> seems to be less offuscated or I'm missing something? > > Yes this looks like the usually used idiom (perhaps more efficient > anyway)... I just kept the style consistent with the old code. > Hiroki-san, could you have a look at this and consider if we should use > this idiom? Also see the mail I had sent in reply to the commit message yesterday. /bz -- Bjoern A. Zeeb The greatest risk is not taking one.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20090609074144.O22887>