On Tue, Nov 16, 2021 at 1:50 AM Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 11/15/21 10:59, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote: > > One minor remark: 'kvm_set_pte_rmapp()' handler is passed to > > 'kvm_handle_gfn_range()' which does > > > > bool ret = false; > > > > for_each_slot_rmap_range(...) > > ret |= handler(...); > > > > and I find '|=' to not be very natural with booleans. I'm not sure it's > > worth changing though. > > Changing that would be "harder" than it seems because "ret = ret || > handler(...)" is wrong, and "|" is even more unnatural than "|=" (so > much that clang warns about it). > > In fact I wonder if "|=" with a bool might end up warning with clang, > which we should check before applying this patch. It doesn't seem to be > in the original commit[1], but better safe than sorry: Nick, does clang > intend to warn also about "ret |= fn()" and "ret &= fn()"? Technically, > it is a bitwise operation with side-effects in the RHS. I think that warning had more to due with typo's where `||` or `&&` was meant (to short circuit the side effects) but `|` or `&` was typed by accident, keeping both side effects. I'm not sure what the typo would be in `ret |= fn();`. > > Paolo > > [1] https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/f59cc9542bfb461 > -- Thanks, ~Nick Desaulniers
