[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [Xen-devel] Re: [RFC PATCH 23/35] Increase x86 interrupt vector range
On 13 May 2006, at 18:44, Chuck Ebbert wrote: AFAIC this could go in anytime. It's simple, self-contained and makes sense even without Xen. One minor nit: the IRQ value isn't negated, it's complemented. The comments need to be fixed. If we really want it disambiguated then we should call it something like 'bitwise-negated' or 'ones-complemented'. 'Complemented' alone is worse than 'negated' imo, since negation is at least the usual name for the tilde operator in C while complementation is an ambiguous term unless you know the base/radix. -- Keir _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
![]() |
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |