Re: [RFC] change non-atomic bitops method

[David Howells]

Uwe Kleine-KÃnig  wrote:

> Might be a matter of taste, but this check is equivalent to
> 
> 	*p != (*p | mask)
> 
> which is what you really want to test for.

I would argue that this is less clear as to what's going on.

David
--
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/