On Sat, 2007-08-25 16:26:07 +0200, Peter Firefly Lund <[email protected]> wrote: > --- lib/radix-tree-old.c 2007-08-25 15:36:40.000000000 +0200 > +++ lib/radix-tree.c 2007-08-25 15:36:51.000000000 +0200 > @@ -980,12 +980,14 @@ radix_tree_node_ctor(void *node, struct > > static __init unsigned long __maxindex(unsigned int height) > { > - unsigned int tmp = height * RADIX_TREE_MAP_SHIFT; > - unsigned long index = (~0UL >> (RADIX_TREE_INDEX_BITS - tmp - 1)) >> 1; > - > - if (tmp >= RADIX_TREE_INDEX_BITS) > - index = ~0UL; > - return index; > + unsigned int tmp = > + int shift = RADIX_TREE_INDEX_BITS - height * RADIX_TREE_MAP_SHIFT; > + unsigned long index; > + > + if (shift < 0) > + return ~0UL; > + else > + return ~0UL >> shift; > } > > static __init void radix_tree_init_maxindex(void) `index' seems to be unused now? And indention does neither follow kernel coding style, nor this file's style. You'd also hammer out `tmp' and put its initializer right there where it's used. MfG, JBG -- Jan-Benedict Glaw [email protected] +49-172-7608481 Signature of: Träume nicht von Dein Leben: Lebe Deinen Traum! the second :
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
- References:
- [PATCH] avoid negative shifts in radix-tree.c
- From: Peter Firefly Lund <[email protected]>
- [PATCH] avoid negative shifts in radix-tree.c
- Prev by Date: Re: [patch v2 1/1] md: Software Raid autodetect dev list not array
- Next by Date: Re: [PATCH] atyfb: remove dead code
- Previous by thread: [PATCH] avoid negative shifts in radix-tree.c
- Next by thread: Re: [PATCH] avoid negative shifts in radix-tree.c
- Index(es):
 |