On 05/23/2012 09:54 AM, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 9:47 AM, H. Peter Anvin <hpa@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> Any reason we can't just tell people to use BIT() for a native "unsigned >> long" type (32/64 bits) and BIT_64() if they really want a 64-bit result? > > Well, that's what we're doing now. And it seems to have resulted in > repeated bugs for architectures where most of the developers run on > 64-bit machines, but the same code is actually supposed to work on > 32-bit too (ie x86). > Yes, but I fear that this will result in more subtle bugs which will therefore be even harder to detect and diagnose. -hpa -- H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center I work for Intel. I don't speak on their behalf. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-tip-commits" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
|