Re: seperator error in __mask_snprintf_len

[Joe Korty]

On Wed, Jan 14, 2004 at 03:03:31PM -0800, Paul Jackson wrote:
> Joe - question - is there any good reason not to use Paul M's
> suggestion, eor'ing the index with 1 on 64 bit big endian hardware?
> I have a patch about ready (as soon as I can get time on my big system
> to test it) that uses the eor 1 idea.

In principle it should work fine.  The details will be in the code
of course.

I've been working on-and-off on fixing the equivalent endian problem
in __mask_parse_len.  How is that part going for you?  I haven't yet
decided if I want to post it.

-- 
"Money can buy bandwidth, but latency is forever" -- John Mashey
Joe
-
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/