Hi Michael, On Tue, Jan 03, 2023 at 11:21:08AM +0100, Michael Walle wrote: > Hi Russell, > > Am 2023-01-03 11:13, schrieb Russell King (Oracle): > > On Wed, Dec 28, 2022 at 12:07:19AM +0100, Michael Walle wrote: > > > + if (!bus || !bus->name) > > > + return -EINVAL; > > > + > > > + /* An access method always needs both read and write operations */ > > > + if ((bus->read && !bus->write) || > > > + (!bus->read && bus->write) || > > > + (bus->read_c45 && !bus->write_c45) || > > > + (!bus->read_c45 && bus->write_c45)) > > > > I wonder whether the following would be even more readable: > > > > if (!bus->read != !bus->write || !bus->read_c45 != !bus->write_c45) > > That's what Andrew had originally. But there was a comment from Sergey [1] > which I agree with. I had a hard time wrapping my head around that, so I > just listed all the possible bad cases. The only reason I suggested it was because when looked at your code, it also took several reads to work out what it was trying to do! Would using !!bus->read != !!bus->write would help or make it worse, !!ptr being the more normal way to convert something to a boolean? -- RMK's Patch system: https://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/ FTTP is here! 40Mbps down 10Mbps up. Decent connectivity at last!
