Jonathan Larmour jifl@eCosCentric.com
Tue Jan 28 20:35:00 GMT 2003

Andrew Lunn wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 28, 2003 at 04:22:10AM +0000, Jonathan Larmour wrote:
>>Andrew Lunn wrote:
>>>It seems to me the cdl legal_value is wrong. 
>>>There is a bitmap kept for which kernel thread data entries are in
>>>use. So for example, if thread entry 10 is in use, bit 10 of
>>>thread_data_map will be reset. Now thread_data_map is of type
>>>cyg_count32. ie its 32 bits. So the upper legal value should be 31,
>>>not 65535. 32 may work, but that depends on what value 1<<32 gives.
>>One too big for a 32-bit word certainly! I've corrected this in CVS.
> Thats what im relying on. 1<<32 should be 0 on most processors. If so,
> it all works out correct. But its not something i would trust unless
> it was written down in some standard and gcc actually implements that
> standard.

Standards never make assumptions about things like sizeof(int), so while 
it may be true for GCC, it's definitely not to be relied on.

eCosCentric       http://www.eCosCentric.com/       <info@eCosCentric.com>
--[ "You can complain because roses have thorns, or you ]--
--[  can rejoice because thorns have roses." -Lincoln   ]-- Opinions==mine

Before posting, please read the FAQ: http://sources.redhat.com/fom/ecos
and search the list archive: http://sources.redhat.com/ml/ecos-discuss

More information about the Ecos-discuss mailing list