This is merely a historical archive of years 2008-2021, before the migration to mailman3.
A maintained and still updated list archive can be found at https://lists.osmocom.org/hyperkitty/list/gerrit-log@lists.osmocom.org/.
Holger Freyther gerrit-no-reply at lists.osmocom.orgPatch Set 2: Code-Review-2 > I've tried to implement this comparison and got really weird > results: > I might be missing smth but home come lsb in a byte can be more > than 8? Could it be that using negation on unsigned type somehow > confused gcc? Or some sort of template optimization magic went > wrong? This sends a red signal. First the commit message doesn't explain the motivation. How things are verified, requires Pespin to look at the ffs implementation and Harald to ask you to compare them. Such churn is very dangerous. it can create subtle changes and apparently we don't have good coverage here. So ffs returns you the bit number (1 << ffs(16)) while pcb_lsb returns a number with the lsb set. > Anyway, I think it's yet another reason to replace it with standard > function which behaves as expected. Neither pespin nor me have used ffs. So "expected" is vague here but the question is which semantic is expected by the code around? -- To view, visit https://gerrit.osmocom.org/3896 To unsubscribe, visit https://gerrit.osmocom.org/settings Gerrit-MessageType: comment Gerrit-Change-Id: I2d14ef327b09173d56ee3bca7e3ca85897d381c7 Gerrit-PatchSet: 2 Gerrit-Project: osmo-pcu Gerrit-Branch: master Gerrit-Owner: Max <msuraev at sysmocom.de> Gerrit-Reviewer: Harald Welte <laforge at gnumonks.org> Gerrit-Reviewer: Holger Freyther <holger at freyther.de> Gerrit-Reviewer: Jenkins Builder Gerrit-Reviewer: Max <msuraev at sysmocom.de> Gerrit-Reviewer: Pau Espin Pedrol <pespin at sysmocom.de> Gerrit-HasComments: No