Date: 19 Sep 2003 08:55:00 +0200
From: kaih@khms.westfalen.de (Kai Henningsen)
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Message-ID: <8uAuunHHw-B@khms.westfalen.de>
In-Reply-To: <20030917211200.GA5997@wotan.suse.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Athlon/Opteron Prefetch Fix for 2.6.0test5 + numbers
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Organization: Organisation? Me?! Are you kidding?
References: <20030917202100.GC4723@wotan.suse.de> <Pine.LNX.4.44.0309171332200.2523-100000@laptop.osdl.org> <Pine.LNX.4.44.0309171332200.2523-100000@laptop.osdl.org> <20030917211200.GA5997@wotan.suse.de>
Comment: Unsolicited commercial mail will incur an US$100 handling fee per received mail.
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 897
Lines: 22

ak@suse.de (Andi Kleen)  wrote on 17.09.03 in <20030917211200.GA5997@wotan.suse.de>:

> On Wed, Sep 17, 2003 at 01:50:59PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:

> > Also, you do things like comparing pointers for less/greater than, and at
> > least some versions of gcc has done that wrong - using signed comparisons.
>
> Really? Is that any version we still support (2.95+) ?
> It is certainly legal ISO-C. I changed it for now.

It certainly is *not* legal ISO C, and never was.

Pointer comparision is *only* legal in ISO C if both pointers point to the  
same object - same variable, or same piece of malloc'd memory. Anything  
else is undefined.

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