I get it now. Thanks. I code, therefore I am --- On Sun, 5/15/11, Andreas Schwab <schwab@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > From: Andreas Schwab <schwab@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Subject: Re: Possible coding issue in udf?? > To: "Alex Davis" <alex14641@xxxxxxxxx> > Cc: linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-fsdevel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Date: Sunday, May 15, 2011, 1:13 PM > Alex Davis <alex14641@xxxxxxxxx> > writes: > > > In fs/udf/inode.c, line 1455, linux 2.6.35, there is > the following code: > > > > udfperms = ((inode->i_mode & > S_IRWXO)) | > > > ((inode->i_mode & S_IRWXG) << > 2) | > > > ((inode->i_mode & S_IRWXU) << > 4); > > > > Shouldn't we be shifting by 3 bits? i.e: > > udfperms = ((inode->i_mode & > S_IRWXO)) | > > > ((inode->i_mode & S_IRWXG) << > 3) | > > > ((inode->i_mode & S_IRWXU) << > 6); > > udfperms contains three bit fields of 5 bits each, of which > 3 bits are > each filled from one of the three RWX parts of i_mode, and > 2 bits > (DELETE and CHATTR) are added later. Thus each of the > three bit fields > are expanded from 3 to 5 bits, so that the second one needs > to be > shifted by 2 and the third one by 4. > > Andreas. > > -- > Andreas Schwab, schwab@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx > GPG Key fingerprint = 58CA 54C7 6D53 942B 1756 01D3 > 44D5 214B 8276 4ED5 > "And now for something completely different." > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
