[PATCH 0/10] use safer test on the result of find_first_zero_bit

Julia Lawall julia.lawall at lip6.fr
Wed Jun 4 02:38:13 PDT 2014

On Wed, 4 Jun 2014, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:

> Hi Julia,
> On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 11:07 AM, Julia Lawall <Julia.Lawall at lip6.fr> wrote:
> > Find_first_zero_bit considers BITS_PER_LONG bits at a time, and thus may
> > return a larger number than the maximum position argument if that position
> > is not a multiple of BITS_PER_LONG.
> Shouldn't this be fixed in find_first_zero_bit() instead?

OK, I could do that as well.  Most of the callers currently test with >=.
Should they be left as is, or changed to use ==?


More information about the ath10k mailing list