Carson Gaspar wrote:
Hans-Werner Paulsen wrote:
On Sun, Oct 07, 2007 at 01:15:00PM -0400, Marc Dionne wrote:
+ else if (hval >= 1<<31)
this patch is fine for architectures where the size of "unsigned long"
is 4 bytes. But on the x86_64 architecture this will not work, because
the size is 8 bytes. One can use "unsigned int".
Ummm... no. This whole thing is way too fragile. If you care about how
many bits the variable has, you MUST use something like uint32_t. Or you
can not care, and use sizeof() to generate your comparison. But you MUST
NOT use "int" or "long" and hard-code bit shifts.
Sure enough - with the original patch I was trying to confirm that this
was indeed the issue, and didn't try to be generic.
How about something like this, with an unsigned int for hval:
else if (hval >= 1<<(sizeof(hval)*8-1))
which seems functionally equivalent to the original code and not
dependent on the size of hval.
Now I'm curious as to why the specific value returned by DirHash even
matters. Even with the gcc bug it would be consistent for a given
string on the same client. Does this value have to match what's
computed for the same string on the file server side? (looks like
DirHash is also used in fileserver) If so, it looks like the original
code could produce different values with different size ints on the
server and client.
Marc
_______________________________________________
OpenAFS-info mailing list
OpenAFS-info@openafs.org
https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-info
