On 07/26/2018 04:48 PM, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 11:07 AM, Wei Wang <wei.w.w...@intel.com> wrote:
The existing BITMAP_LAST_WORD_MASK macro returns 0xffffffff if nbits is
0. This patch changes the macro to return 0 when there is no bit needs to
be masked.
Can you provide a practical example of what's going wrong before this
patch applied?
The reason of making this patch is that I saw some other software which
ports this function and has possibilities to fall into bugs with usages
which pass 0 to the macro. So I wonder if it would be necessary to make
such changes in case we would get a similar bug. Or adding something to
explain that "0" is not applicable to this macro as a reminder to people
who would use it.
Best,
Wei
