On Fri, Feb 23, 2007 at 11:43:44PM +0100, Richard Knutsson wrote:
> >I am saying that IMO input's BIT definition should be
> >adequate for 99% of potential users and that I would be OK with moving
> >said BIT definition from input.h to bitops.h and maybe supplementing
> >it with LLBIT. I am also saying that I do not want BITWRAP, BITSWAP
> >(what swap btw?) nor BIT(x % BITS_PER_LONG) in input drivers.
And I totally agree with Dmitry. The "% BITS_PER_LONG" doesn't hurt
other users, and it's needed for larger-than-single-long bit arrays.
> Is the reason for the modulo to put a bitmask larger then the variable
> into an array?
The complementary LONG() macro will tell you the index of an array of
longs where the bit should be set.
> I did just a quick 'grep' for "BIT(" in drivers/input/
> and from what I saw, most (or all?) of the values are defined constants
> and those in input.h were noway near the limits of a 'long'.
Well, many do not need it, but for example BIT(BTN_LEFT) does, and
that's used in a lot of places.
> The reason I don't like it with modulo is simply because it hides
> potential bugs (when x is to big).
That would be my only concern - losing compiler warnings.
> And what about the "1%"?
The 1% will need either LLBIT or an extra % 8.
> IMHO BIT should be as simple as possible.
--
Vojtech Pavlik
Director SuSE Labs
-
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/
[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]
