Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 01/18] avoid dubiously clever code in win32_start_timer

[Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws>]

On 03/10/2010 04:38 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> The code is initializing an unsigned int to UINT_MAX using "-1", so that
> the following always-true comparison seems to be always-false at a
> first look.  Since alarm timer initializations are never nested, it is
> simpler to unconditionally store the result of timeGetDevCaps into
> data->period.
>
> Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini<pbonzini@redhat.com>
>    

Applied all.  Thanks.

Nice cleanup.

Regards,

Anthony Liguori

> ---
>   vl.c |    6 ++----
>   1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/vl.c b/vl.c
> index d8328c7..6b1e1a7 100644
> --- a/vl.c
> +++ b/vl.c
> @@ -626,7 +626,7 @@ static struct qemu_alarm_timer *alarm_timer;
>   struct qemu_alarm_win32 {
>       MMRESULT timerId;
>       unsigned int period;
> -} alarm_win32_data = {0, -1};
> +} alarm_win32_data = {0, 0};
>
>   static int win32_start_timer(struct qemu_alarm_timer *t);
>   static void win32_stop_timer(struct qemu_alarm_timer *t);
> @@ -1360,9 +1360,7 @@ static int win32_start_timer(struct qemu_alarm_timer *t)
>       memset(&tc, 0, sizeof(tc));
>       timeGetDevCaps(&tc, sizeof(tc));
>
> -    if (data->period<  tc.wPeriodMin)
> -        data->period = tc.wPeriodMin;
> -
> +    data->period = tc.wPeriodMin;
>       timeBeginPeriod(data->period);
>
>       flags = TIME_CALLBACK_FUNCTION;
>