Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
static bool stateid_generation_after(stateid_t *a, stateid_t *b)
{
return (s32)a->si_generation - (s32)b->si_generation > 0;
}
overflow is undefined for signed integers and gcc uses that nowadays.
Not sure if that can affect the above code?
I guess the intent there is to account for stateid wraparound. But it's not
clear to me this is doing the right thing. I think C specifies overflow
behavior for unsigned but not signed. So shouldn't it be something more like
this?
(s32)(a->si_generation - b->si_generation) > 0
Either way, this probably deserves a comment.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
