Re: [PATCH 4/6] Squelch warning about an integer overflow

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@xxxxxx> writes:

> Hi Junio,
>
> On Mon, 26 Oct 2015, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>
>> Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@xxxxxx> writes:
>> 
>> > We cannot rely on long integers to have more than 32 bits...
>> >
>> > Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@xxxxxx>
>> > ---
>> 
>> Interesting.  8192 * 1024 * 1024 does not fit within 32-bit long, of
>> course.  Perhaps we can lose L after 1024 if we are explicitly
>> saying that the result ought to be size_t (which may be larger than
>> long)?
>
> Sure. But it would make the patch harder to read.
>
> Do you insist?

Not at all.  I think the series is already in 'next', and if I
haven't merged it yet, I should.


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]