Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/1] smi_detector: A System Management Interrupt
 detector
From: Jon Masters <jonathan@jonmasters.org>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, tglx@linutronix.de, mingo@elte.hu,
       rostedt@goodmis.org
In-Reply-To: <20090609145607.d8944778.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
References: <20090531163117.502167374@jonmasters.org>
	 <20090531163343.771922592@jonmasters.org>
	 <20090601205720.825d3048.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
	 <1244584201.30733.93.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	 <20090609145607.d8944778.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Content-Type: text/plain
Organization: World Organi[sz]ation Of Broken Dreams
Date: Tue, 09 Jun 2009 18:53:27 -0400
Message-Id: <1244588008.30733.94.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 870
Lines: 34

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.


--
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/