Re: PATCH - x86-64 signed-compare bug, was Re: select() setting ERESTARTNOHAND (514).

From: Neil Brown <[email protected]>
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2007 11:37:05 +1100

> On x86-64, regs->rax is "unsigned long", so the following is
> needed....
> 
> I haven't tried it yet.

Doesn't type promotion take care of that?  Did you verify
that assember?

I checked the assembler on sparc64 for similar constructs
and it does the right thing.
-
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/

---

• References:
  • select() setting ERESTARTNOHAND (514).
    • From: Sean Reifschneider <[email protected]>
  • PATCH - x86-64 signed-compare bug, was Re: select() setting ERESTARTNOHAND (514).
    • From: Neil Brown <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: PATCH - x86-64 signed-compare bug, was Re: select() setting ERESTARTNOHAND (514).
• Next by Date: Re: [REGRESSION] 2.6.19/2.6.20-rc3 buffered write slowdown
• Previous by thread: Re: PATCH - x86-64 signed-compare bug, was Re: select() setting ERESTARTNOHAND (514).
• Next by thread: Fwd: DMA problems in ide-scsi
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]