Re: [RFC][Update][Patch 12/16]Fix undefined ">> 32" in revoke code

Mingming Cao wrote:
> "val >> 32" is undefined if val is a 32-bit value, so this code is
> broken if CONFIG_LBD is not set.  Make it safe for that case.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Stephen Tweedie <[email protected]>
> Signed-off-by: Mingming Cao <[email protected]>
> 
> 
> ---
> 
>  linux-2.6.17-ming/fs/jbd/revoke.c |    2 +-
>  1 files changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff -puN fs/jbd/revoke.c~jbd-revoke-32bit-shift-fix fs/jbd/revoke.c
> --- linux-2.6.17/fs/jbd/revoke.c~jbd-revoke-32bit-shift-fix	2006-06-28 16:47:09.695458913 -0700
> +++ linux-2.6.17-ming/fs/jbd/revoke.c	2006-06-28 16:47:09.699458454 -0700
> @@ -110,7 +110,7 @@ static inline int hash(journal_t *journa
>  {
>  	struct jbd_revoke_table_s *table = journal->j_revoke;
>  	int hash_shift = table->hash_shift;
> -	int hash = (int)block ^ (int)(block >> 32);
> +	int hash = (int)block ^ (int)((block >> 31) >> 1);
>  

It might be better to code it as:

	(int)((u64)block >> 32)

... which gcc can trivially recognize as 0 if block is 32 bits.  Not 
sure if it can do that with the code above.

	-hpa
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html