search for: clustshift

Hi Shao, You're right, "a=b=<immediate value>;" wasn't the actual issue. On 2016.03.06 20:34, Shao Miller via Syslinux wrote: > If this change is simply due to a mental note about an incident where a > compiler once complained about this type of thing The problem was due to the following warning when compiling for 64-bit using using the latest WDK (7600.16385.1),

...implementation without incident. Regarding [4]: The code expects that the shifted 'libfat_sector_t' value will certainly fit in the 31 value bits of an 'int32_t'. The logic prior to that might even prove it, but we'd have to follow such things as whether or not 'fs->clustshift' is sanity-checked, etc. If the warning is ugly and the cast is ugly, there are other solutions, including: 1. Increase the precision of 'cluster'. It seems that there are bitwise operations performed, so this probably isn't a good idea. 2. Use a macro or inline function with...

...t; incident. > > Regarding [4]: The code expects that the shifted 'libfat_sector_t' value > will certainly fit in the 31 value bits of an 'int32_t'. The logic prior to > that might even prove it, but we'd have to follow such things as whether or > not 'fs->clustshift' is sanity-checked, etc. > > If the warning is ugly and the cast is ugly, there are other solutions, > including: > > 1. Increase the precision of 'cluster'. It seems that there are bitwise > operations performed, so this probably isn't a good idea. > > 2. U...