lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [Jul]   [8]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v2] tpm: tpm_ibm_vtpm: Fix unallocated banks
On Mon, Jul 08, 2019 at 06:24:04PM -0400, Mimi Zohar wrote:
> > static int tpm_get_pcr_allocation(struct tpm_chip *chip)
> > {
> > int rc;
> >
> > rc = (chip->flags & TPM_CHIP_FLAG_TPM2) ?
> > tpm2_get_pcr_allocation(chip) :
> > tpm1_get_pcr_allocation(chip);
>
> >
> > return rc > 0 ? -ENODEV : rc;
> > }
> >
> > This addresses the issue that Stefan also pointed out. You have to
> > deal with the TPM error codes.
>
> Hm, in the past I was told by Christoph not to use the ternary
> operator.  Have things changed?  Other than removing the comment, the
> only other difference is the return.

In the end it is a matter of personal preference, but I find the
quote version above using the ternary horribly obsfucated.

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-07-09 00:43    [W:0.113 / U:0.144 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site