Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [RFC PATCH 1/1] smi_detector: A System Management Interrupt detector | From | Jon Masters <> | Date | Tue, 09 Jun 2009 18:53:27 -0400 |
| |
On Tue, 2009-06-09 at 14:56 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Tue, 09 Jun 2009 17:50:01 -0400 > Jon Masters <jonathan@jonmasters.org> wrote: > > > > > + if (0 != err) > > > > > > if (err != 0) > > > > > > or > > > > > > if (err) > > > > > > would be more typical. > > > > The former runs the risk of assignment, > > yup, which is why gcc will warn if you do > > if (err = 0) > > If you really meant to do that, then gcc can be silenced by > double-parenthesising. We consider this "good enough" for kernel > purposes, so we generally don't use the `if (CONSTANT == variable)' trick.
Ah, yes, good point.
Jon.
| |