On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 04:08:47PM -0800, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi, > > On Tue, 25 Nov 2008 10:46:30 -0800 "Luis R. Rodriguez" <lrodriguez@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 06:57:01AM -0800, John W. Linville wrote: > > > I have the patch now...thanks! > > > > > > Now, if I only knew why my build didn't fail with the original code... > > > > Same here I run tests with sparse too prior to sending patches. > > It is valid C. > > if (a, b) > > you evaluate a and discard it then evaluate b and that is the value of > the conditional expression. In this case b is just a string which is > effectively a non NULL "const char *" which is just non zero as far as if > is concerned. So the conditional expression evaluates to (constant) > true. So this was, in fact a bug ... Thanks, and good catch :) Luis -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-next" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
