On Sat, Jul 04, 2009 at 07:45:15PM +0200, Christoph Egger wrote:
Grrr.... I hate those sort of defines - they just force you to go
and look up their definitions to see which numbering scheme is being
used.
IMHO using (1 << n) is enough to say 'these might be or'ed together.
Even a sequence of hex constants will be an obvious bit pattern list.
David
--
David Laight: david@l8s.co.uk
| Eric Paris | [RFC 0/5] [TALPA] Intro to a linux interface for on access scanning |
| Mark Fasheh | Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.23 -- sys_fallocate |
| Linus Torvalds | Linux 2.6.21-rc4 |
| Linus Torvalds | Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3 |
git: | |
| David Miller | [GIT]: Networking |
| David Miller | Re: [PATCH] pkt_sched: Destroy gen estimators under rtnl_lock(). |
| Gerrit Renker | [PATCH 15/37] dccp: Set per-connection CCIDs via socket options |
| Christoph Lameter | Network latency regressions from 2.6.22 to 2.6.29 |
