Re: [PATCH] staging: r8188eu: combine nested if statements into one

[Philipp Hortmann]

On 6/24/22 05:30, Chang Yu wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 23, 2022 at 12:05:40PM +0000, David Laight wrote:
> > ...
> > > Seems to work. But the rules which operation is done first && or == are
> > > not too easy.
> >
> > They are the way around you want them to be.
> > == generates a truth value.
> > && and || compare truth values,
> >
> > The only 'wrong' operator priorities are & and |.
> > The short-circuiting && and || weren't in the very early
> > versions of C - the bitwise & and | were used.
> > When K&R added && and || they left the priorities of & an | alone.
> > I they they've later said they should have bitten the bullet
> > and changed the priorities and all the existing C code
> >
> > > I would prefer to have:
> > >
> > > if (padapter && (pfree_recv_queue == free_recv_queue))
> > >
> > > So it is very easy to read what is evaluated first.
> >
> > That just starts adding too many () and makes more complex
> > conditionals hard to read.
> >
> > 	David
> >
> > > But this is just my opinion and does not have to be right.
> > >
> > > Thanks for your patch.
> > >
> > > Bye Philipp
> >
> > -
> > Registered Address Lakeside, Bramley Road, Mount Farm, Milton Keynes, MK1 1PT, UK
> > Registration No: 1397386 (Wales)
>
> In my humble opinion it just boils down to personal preference in this
> case. The kernel coding style guidlines don't seem to have a definitive
> gold standard regarding this. I will leave the patch as-is for now, but
> if anybody feels strongly that the () needs to be removed please feel
> free to let me know and I'll make the change.

Please consider that the person you want to sign-of for this patch is 
most likely Greg K-H. I propose to fix first what he is asking for.

Bye Philipp