On 07.10.2013 21:04, Sean Bruno wrote: > Proposed patch to eliminate this check. If I understand the macro > correctly, there's no way for these checks to ever do anything as bit > shifting an unsigned will simply clear out the value. So, the check for > <0 is completely bogus? Hello! I think you're right. I saw Clang reporting those warnings. Coverity has many more. I didn't want to fix them for now, to ease future merges from Linux. The plan is to submit patches to upstream at some point. Thanks for the patch! I should prepare a branch to store that kind of fixes. -- Jean-Sébastien Pédron
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:40:42 UTC