Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S272057AbTHKFm2 (ORCPT ); Mon, 11 Aug 2003 01:42:28 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S272120AbTHKFm2 (ORCPT ); Mon, 11 Aug 2003 01:42:28 -0400 Received: from mail.jlokier.co.uk ([81.29.64.88]:41093 "EHLO mail.jlokier.co.uk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S272057AbTHKFm1 (ORCPT ); Mon, 11 Aug 2003 01:42:27 -0400 Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2003 06:42:09 +0100 From: Jamie Lokier To: Willy Tarreau Cc: Chip Salzenberg , Albert Cahalan , linux-kernel mailing list , davem@redhat.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] 2.4.22pre10: {,un}likely_p() macros for pointers Message-ID: <20030811054209.GN10446@mail.jlokier.co.uk> References: <1060488233.780.65.camel@cube> <20030810072945.GA14038@alpha.home.local> <20030811012337.GI24349@perlsupport.com> <20030811020957.GE10446@mail.jlokier.co.uk> <20030811023912.GJ24349@perlsupport.com> <20030811053059.GB28640@alpha.home.local> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20030811053059.GB28640@alpha.home.local> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 593 Lines: 17 Willy Tarreau wrote: > So in any case, the !!(x) construct should be valid. Yes, either of these is fine for pointers and integers alike: #define likely(x) __builtin_expect ((x) != 0, 1) #define unlikely(x) __builtin_expect ((x) != 0, 0) #define likely(x) __builtin_expect (!!(x), 1) #define unlikely(x) __builtin_expect (!!(x), 0) -- Jamie - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/