On 22 Apr 2022, at 10:29, David Marchand wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 20, 2022 at 10:19 AM Eelco Chaudron <echau...@redhat.com> wrote:
>> On 19 Apr 2022, at 18:20, Harry van Haaren wrote:
>>
>>> The code changes here are to handle (1 << i) shifts where 'i' is the
>>> packet index in the batch, and 1 << 31 is an overflow of the signed '1'.
>>>
>>> Fixed by adding ULL suffix to the 1 character, ensuring compiler knows
>>> the 1 is unsigned (and 32-bits minimum). Undefined Behaviour sanitizer
>>> is now happy with the shifts at runtime.
>>
>> Change looks good to me, but should 1UL not be enough, as the destinations
>> are all 32-bit?
>
> For storing/comparing to explicit uint32_t variables, either
> (uint32_t)1 or UINT32_C(1) are more natural.
> Any reason not to use those?
Forgot about those :) They are even better...
_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
d...@openvswitch.org
https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev
