Re: [RFC PATCH 1/1] smi_detector: A System Management Interruptdetector

[Andrew Morton]

On Tue, 09 Jun 2009 17:50:01 -0400
Jon Masters <jonathan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 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.


> whereas <value> != <variable>
> will generate a compiler error if it goes wrong, so I trained myself to
> always do that. The desired value is zero, so I prefer to show that in
> the test, but I have changed it following your advice anyway - it's like
> how I have to force myself not to use '{' '}' on single line
> if-statements despite generally doing so, again for safety :)
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/