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.
