On 07/26/2011 10:32 AM, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
I think the adjustment above is intended to match the adjustment of the address by bitregion_start/BITS_PER_UNIT, but the above seems to assume that bitregion_start%BITS_PER_UNIT == 0.That was intentional. bitregion_start always falls on a byte boundary, does it not?
Ah, yes, of course, it's bitnum that might not. The code changes look good, then.
Jason
