From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1NInQa-0003uO-9d for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 10 Dec 2009 13:07:48 -0500 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1NInQV-0003lQ-Lv for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 10 Dec 2009 13:07:47 -0500 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=45735 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NInQV-0003l5-GI for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 10 Dec 2009 13:07:43 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:56531) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1NInQU-0003As-M2 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 10 Dec 2009 13:07:43 -0500 Received: from int-mx03.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx03.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.16]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id nBAI7esq024382 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK) for ; Thu, 10 Dec 2009 13:07:41 -0500 Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2009 20:04:56 +0200 From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: [FOR 0.12 PATCH 2/4] pci: don't hw_error() when no slot is available. Message-ID: <20091210180455.GA20205@redhat.com> References: <1260439868-15061-1-git-send-email-kraxel@redhat.com> <1260439868-15061-3-git-send-email-kraxel@redhat.com> <20091210120806.GB13657@redhat.com> <4B20E73E.6070408@redhat.com> <20091210122305.GD13657@redhat.com> <20091210132252.GW7645@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20091210132252.GW7645@redhat.com> List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Gleb Natapov Cc: Gerd Hoffmann , qemu-devel@nongnu.org On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 03:22:52PM +0200, Gleb Natapov wrote: > On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 02:23:05PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 01:19:10PM +0100, Gerd Hoffmann wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > >>> + if (pci_dev == NULL) { > > >>> + hw_error("PCI: can't register device\n"); > > >>> + } > > >> > > >> Can you please use !pci_dev for these checks? > > > > > > Why? IMHO the code is more readable that way. It is easy to miss a > > > single '!' character when reading the code, so I tend to write such > > > tests in a more verbose fashion. > > > > > > cheers, > > > Gerd > > > > Reader has limited short term memory. Don't fill it up with > > irrelevant detail. In places where it might be confusing, > > a comment might be appropriate, this is not one of them. > > > > C is a terse language. !x is a standard idiom. Let's use it. > > > ! is for boolean. In which language? Not in C. > pci_dev is not boolean. > -- > Gleb.