Messages in this thread | ![/](/images/icornerl.gif) | | Date | Mon, 24 Aug 2009 18:23:06 +0800 | From | Amerigo Wang <> | Subject | Re: [Patch 5/8] ia64: implement crashkernel=auto |
| |
Bernhard Walle wrote: > * Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> [2009-08-24 09:43]: > >> * Amerigo Wang <amwang@redhat.com> wrote: >> >>> The reason that I kept 2ULL<<30 instead of 1ULL<<31 is that '1<<30' is >>> exactly 1G, so 2ULL<<30 can be easily read as 2G. ;) >>> >> i have no trouble reading 1ULL<<31 as 2G ;-) OTOH, the logic and >> pattern of the comparisons (especially without the comment) looked >> odd at first sight, until i noticed this. >> > > Why not just something like > > #define KBYTE(x) ((x)*1024ULL) > #define MBYTE(x) ((x)*1024ULL*1024) > #define GBYTE(x) ((x)*1024ULL*1024*1024) > #define TBYTE(x) ((x)*1024ULL*1024*1024*1024) > > I find GBYTE(2) much easier to read than 1ULL<<31. Honestly, I would > add a comment '/* 2G */' if I would write 1ULL<<31 in own code. > > But I'm of course not one of that super kernel hackers. ;-) > >
Yeah, great. Here we only need MBYTES() and GBYTES(). ;)
Thanks.
| ![\](/images/icornerr.gif) |