Re: [PATCH 00/15] bitops: Change bitmap index from int to unsignedlong

[Peter Zijlstra]

On Wed, 2009-02-25 at 08:37 -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 07:54:48AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > unsigned int wasn't large enough?
> 
> Adding one more bit only doubles the maximum size.  That buys us, what,
> another eighteen months until we have to change it again?  Unsigned long
> seems most sensible to me.  Unsigned long long probably isn't worth
> doing -- you'd have to be using one eighth of your address space on a
> single bitmap.

Are you serious? Bitmaps of length 4G-bit (512M-byte) are way past the
sanely allocatable size anyway.

The complaint was that the signed thingy resulted in out of bounds
pointers (apparently unsigned doesn't?)

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/