> - u32 func_encode = func | > - ((is_Pf == true ? 1 : 0) << IGU_FID_ENCODE_IS_PF_SHIFT); > + u32 func_encode = func | (is_Pf ? 1 : 0) << IGU_FID_ENCODE_IS_PF_SHIFT; This sort of thing is why I personally don't like 'bool' at all. If 'is_Pf' were an integer type that is known to only contain 0 or 1 then the code can just be: u32 func_encode = func | is_Pf << IGU_FID_ENCODE_IS_PF_SHIFT; although that is still valid when is_Pf is bool, the compiler is required to generate code on every access that converts all non-zero values to 1 - so the generated code is likely to be 'is_Pf ? 1 : 0'. The generated code is particularly horrid for boolean arithmetic. IIRC: bool_var &= bool_var_1; typically requires a sequence of compare and branch instructions. David -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
