On Monday 24 March 2014 01:09:01 you wrote:
On Monday, 24 March 2014, at 12:06 am, Tito wrote:
On Sunday 23 March 2014 23:09:59 you wrote:
This is still going to create a hell when adding the discard flag.
Consider what will happen in the enum: if DISCARD is enabled but PRI is
Applied, thanks
On Sun, Mar 23, 2014 at 12:33 AM, Matt Whitlock
busy...@mattwhitlock.name wrote:
Attached are a series of three patches affecting swaponoff.
Patch #1 fixes two small logic errors: (a) the bb_strtou function was called
inside an instantiation of the MIN macro, which would
On Sunday 23 March 2014 00:33:04 Matt Whitlock wrote:
Attached are a series of three patches affecting swaponoff.
Patch #1 fixes two small logic errors: (a) the bb_strtou function was called
inside an instantiation of the MIN macro, which would cause the function to
be called twice in the
On Sunday, 23 March 2014, at 8:29 pm, Tito wrote:
On Sunday 23 March 2014 00:33:04 Matt Whitlock wrote:
Attached are a series of three patches affecting swaponoff.
Hi,
attached you will find a alternative patch to your patches #1 and #2 that
includes your fixes and
improvements and
On Sunday 23 March 2014 23:09:59 you wrote:
On Sunday, 23 March 2014, at 8:29 pm, Tito wrote:
On Sunday 23 March 2014 00:33:04 Matt Whitlock wrote:
Attached are a series of three patches affecting swaponoff.
Hi,
attached you will find a alternative patch to your patches #1 and #2 that
On Monday, 24 March 2014, at 12:06 am, Tito wrote:
On Sunday 23 March 2014 23:09:59 you wrote:
This is still going to create a hell when adding the discard flag.
Consider what will happen in the enum: if DISCARD is enabled but PRI is
disabled, then OPT_d will be (1 1), but if both are
Attached are a series of three patches affecting swaponoff.
Patch #1 fixes two small logic errors: (a) the bb_strtou function was called
inside an instantiation of the MIN macro, which would cause the function to be
called twice in the common case; and (b) the actual maximum allowable swap
