On Tue, May 16, 2023 at 03:13:01PM -0700, Umesh Nerlige Ramappa wrote:
On Tue, May 16, 2023 at 10:24:45AM +0100, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
From: Tvrtko Ursulin
Having it as u64 was a confusing (but harmless) mistake.
Also add some asserts to make sure the internal field does not overflow
in the
On Tue, May 16, 2023 at 10:24:45AM +0100, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
From: Tvrtko Ursulin
Having it as u64 was a confusing (but harmless) mistake.
Also add some asserts to make sure the internal field does not overflow
in the future.
Signed-off-by: Tvrtko Ursulin
Cc: Ashutosh Dixit
Cc: Umesh
On Tue, 16 May 2023 02:24:45 -0700, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
>
> From: Tvrtko Ursulin
>
> Having it as u64 was a confusing (but harmless) mistake.
>
> Also add some asserts to make sure the internal field does not overflow
> in the future.
>
> Signed-off-by: Tvrtko Ursulin
> Cc: Ashutosh Dixit
>
From: Tvrtko Ursulin
Having it as u64 was a confusing (but harmless) mistake.
Also add some asserts to make sure the internal field does not overflow
in the future.
Signed-off-by: Tvrtko Ursulin
Cc: Ashutosh Dixit
Cc: Umesh Nerlige Ramappa
---
I am not entirely sure the
