On Fri, 2012-02-24 at 11:39 +0100, Arend van Spriel wrote:
> On 02/24/2012 08:52 AM, Rafał Miłecki wrote:
> >> + srom_control = bcma_read32(bus->drv_cc.core,
> >> > + BCMA_CC_SROM_CONTROL);
> >> > + return !!(srom_control& BCMA_CC_SROM_CONTROL_PRESENT);
> > Does any compiler complain on returning sth like 0xF as a bool?
> >
>
> The compiler probably will not complain, but the caller could have
> following:
>
> if (bcma_sprom_ext_available(bus) == true) {
> return;
> }
> BUG();
>
> I guess you would see the BUG show up in your log with the function
> returning 0xF.
If it's really
bool foo = a & b;
then the compiler has to compile that as if it was
u8 foo = !!(a & b);
since bool can only carry the values 0 and 1.
So the !! isn't necessary.
johannes
--
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
