2015-02-02 15:28+0100, Paolo Bonzini:
>
>
> On 02/02/2015 15:26, Radim Krčmář wrote:
> >>> > > + return ((logical_id >> 4) == (mda >> 4))
> >>> > > + && (logical_id & mda & 0xf);
> > was merged as
> >
> > + return ((logical_id >> 4) == (mda >> 4))
> > + && (logical_id & mda & 0xf) != 0;
> >
> > but it has to be parenthesized ('&&' has lower precedence than '!=').
>
> Lower precedence means that the merged version is right (unless my brain
> went bonkers, which I cannot exclude). "!=" has higher precedence and
> thus it is implicitly parenthesized.
>
> In fact the first comparison could have its parentheses removed as well.
Yes, it could be,
logical_id >> 4 == mda >> 4 && (logical_id & mda & 0xf) != 0
I missed the point and thought that you wanted to turn the whole
expression into bool, when it already was one.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
