On Sun, Dec 09, 2007 at 08:58:34PM +0200, Dan Kenigsberg wrote: > On Sun, Dec 09, 2007 at 07:29:49PM +0100, Andreas Schwab wrote: > > Dan Kenigsberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > > + x86_cpu_def->vendor1 = val[0] + (val[1] << 8) > > > + + (val[2] << 16) + (val[3] << 24); > > > + x86_cpu_def->vendor2 = val[4] + (val[5] << 8) > > > + + (val[6] << 16) + (val[7] << 24); > > > + x86_cpu_def->vendor3 = val[8] + (val[9] << 8) > > > + + (val[10] << 16) + (val[11] << 24); > > > > That will do the wrong thing with the sign bit. > > > > Please tell me when I'm done making a fool of myself. >
Apparently, I was not done. So I'll just shut up now. Sorry for the noise. Dan.
