From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 06/15] bus: add helper to find which bus
 holds a device
Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2017 22:24:41 +0100
Message-ID: <20170630212440.GA19236@bricha3-MOBL3.ger.corp.intel.com>
References: <cover.1498577192.git.gaetan.rivet@6wind.com>
 <2216663.aYTdufOMPG@xps>
 <CALe+Z002pSmSqHP1dOqKYQggK8RGFnaqk2tyhBCUMp-r6vAXYA@mail.gmail.com>
 <1635095.dVgJJgmtZI@xps>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Cc: Jan Blunck <jblunck@infradead.org>, dev@dpdk.org,
 =?iso-8859-1?Q?Ga=EBtan?= Rivet <gaetan.rivet@6wind.com>,
 Shreyansh Jain <shreyansh.jain@nxp.com>
To: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
Return-path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from mga14.intel.com (mga14.intel.com [192.55.52.115])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A531E37A0
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Fri, 30 Jun 2017 23:24:45 +0200 (CEST)
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1635095.dVgJJgmtZI@xps>
List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org
Sender: "dev" <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>

On Fri, Jun 30, 2017 at 08:29:06PM +0200, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> 30/06/2017 18:46, Jan Blunck:
> > On Fri, Jun 30, 2017 at 11:16 AM, Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net> wrote:
> > > 29/06/2017 20:21, Jan Blunck:
> > >> +static int
> > >> +bus_find_device(const struct rte_bus *bus, const void *_dev)
> > >> +{
> > >> +     struct rte_device *dev;
> > >> +
> > >> +     dev = bus->find_device(NULL, cmp_rte_device, _dev);
> > >> +     return !dev;
> > >> +}
> > >
> > > The preferred code style is to make explicit the NULL comparisons:
> > >         return dev == NULL;
> > 
> > Oh, interesting ... not a lot of C++ programmers around here I guess.
> > 
> > Does this mean you also want me to make integer tests explicit again 0?
> 
> Good question, I don't know.
> I know only this part of the coding rules:
> 	http://dpdk.org/doc/guides/contributing/coding_style.html#null-pointers
> 
Yes, I noticed that gap the other day. IMHO for consistency the integers
should similarly be compared to 0/non-zero explicitly rather than using
"!" operator. The exception I would allow is where a function is named
in such a way that is clearly returns a boolean value as int e.g. a
function "int is_computer_on()".

/Bruce