From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Al Viro Subject: Re: [PATCH]: fixing gcc 4.4 compiler warning: suggest parentheses around operand of ???!??? Date: Thu, 30 Apr 2009 23:26:42 +0100 Message-ID: <20090430222642.GP8633@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> References: <20090430060430.GA6040@localhost> <1241127084.3320.14.camel@mulgrave.int.hansenpartnership.com> <20090430215906.GA5214@mydomain.tld> <1241129324.3320.21.camel@mulgrave.int.hansenpartnership.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from zeniv.linux.org.uk ([195.92.253.2]:40984 "EHLO ZenIV.linux.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752231AbZD3W0p (ORCPT ); Thu, 30 Apr 2009 18:26:45 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1241129324.3320.21.camel@mulgrave.int.hansenpartnership.com> Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org To: James Bottomley Cc: Sergey Senozhatsky , Andrew Morton , linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, Kai Makisara On Thu, Apr 30, 2009 at 10:08:44PM +0000, James Bottomley wrote: > Well, I know why (!STp->use_pf) is wrong: it would set USE_PF in an > incredibly obscure fashon. The flag PF_TESTED seems to imply that it's > a don't check this again type deal, and the if clause is looking for it > not being set, hence I think the most likely thing to be done here is > set the PF_TESTED flag. Not _set_ USE_PF; what's happening there is ^= USE_PF | PF_TESTED; /* we know that PF_TESTED was not set */