Re: [Patch 03/18] define BYTES_PER_WORD

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
From: Andrew Morton
Date: Sunday, June 8, 2008 - 5:12 pm

On Fri, 6 Jun 2008 11:44:55 -0500 Dean Nelson <dcn@sgi.com> wrote:


The patches fill the code with this ">>>" string - which can cause
false positives when people are searching for git rejects.  Although I
(and I suspect most other people) search for "<<<<<<<".


Dunno if this is a desirable thing to have, really.  A "word" is a
somewhat ill-defined thing.  The definition you have here is always
equal to BYTES_PER_LONG.  If BYTES_PER_LONG is inappropriate then
BYTES_PER_POINTER would be clearer.


--
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
[Patch 01/18] define is_shub() and is_uv() macros, Dean Nelson, (Fri Jun 6, 9:42 am)
[Patch 02/18] define xpSalError reason code, Dean Nelson, (Fri Jun 6, 9:43 am)
[Patch 03/18] define BYTES_PER_WORD, Dean Nelson, (Fri Jun 6, 9:44 am)
[Patch 08/18] isolate xpc_vars structure to sn2 only, Dean Nelson, (Fri Jun 6, 9:51 am)
[Patch 12/18] isolate additional sn2 specific code, Dean Nelson, (Fri Jun 6, 9:55 am)
[Patch 14/18] replace AMO_t typedef by struct amo, Dean Nelson, (Fri Jun 6, 9:58 am)
[Patch 17/18] isolate remote copy buffer to sn2 only, Dean Nelson, (Fri Jun 6, 10:02 am)
[Patch 18/18] add _sn2 suffix to a few variables, Dean Nelson, (Fri Jun 6, 10:03 am)
Re: [Patch 03/18] define BYTES_PER_WORD, Andrew Morton, (Sun Jun 8, 5:12 pm)