From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:35840) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cRMYH-00084W-Jm for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 11 Jan 2017 12:19:10 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cRMYG-0001yv-Em for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 11 Jan 2017 12:19:09 -0500 References: <20170111164105.27164.30697.malonedeb@chaenomeles.canonical.com> <4fc41772-1607-7e55-ffa1-80e3579b964d@redhat.com> From: Thomas Huth Message-ID: Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2017 18:19:00 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <4fc41772-1607-7e55-ffa1-80e3579b964d@redhat.com> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="ivb4ho1DMkABKInvX91KVWdiSGVTOnC6R" Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [Bug 1655708] [NEW] target/ppc/int_helper.c:2806: strange expression ? List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Eric Blake , Bug 1655708 <1655708@bugs.launchpad.net>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Jose Ricardo Ziviani Cc: qemu-ppc@nongnu.org This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --ivb4ho1DMkABKInvX91KVWdiSGVTOnC6R From: Thomas Huth To: Eric Blake , Bug 1655708 <1655708@bugs.launchpad.net>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Jose Ricardo Ziviani Cc: qemu-ppc@nongnu.org Message-ID: Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [Bug 1655708] [NEW] target/ppc/int_helper.c:2806: strange expression ? References: <20170111164105.27164.30697.malonedeb@chaenomeles.canonical.com> <4fc41772-1607-7e55-ffa1-80e3579b964d@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <4fc41772-1607-7e55-ffa1-80e3579b964d@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 11.01.2017 18:12, Eric Blake wrote: > On 01/11/2017 10:41 AM, dcb wrote: >> so I think the compiler warning is for the i * 2 lhs of the ?. >=20 > Yes - the compiler is complaining that 'i * 2' can only be non-zero if > 'i' was non-zero (given that the code occurs in a loop for i between 0 > and 16), so it is just as easy to write 'i ? ...' instead of the weirde= r > '(i * 2) ? ...'. =2E.. unless something like (i & 2) was meant instead? Maybe Jose (who wrote that code) could comment on this? Thomas --ivb4ho1DMkABKInvX91KVWdiSGVTOnC6R Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJYdmkJAAoJEC7Z13T+cC21l+kP/1RxQnb8oL+dsrRO4B3xejFS SPu6moVDx9y32bBFsfVNWgNDOMI6/zFLlTv4k+JPcgSeG7nAg5QILkJFvUpvirC1 sCZ13r3bIu5zpiC/uGwQhtdI6eXikRKAWtNp1J2WoOyu3EzTlTbMaEG/hNqOZ68d lov2TV48Xf3RyPuWjmU940N0gV6IiuVADO27nxxQ6Hkewq3oeUyHth5rLjdNQ+OR Wg098eA7jFetXC+VJ/38hlPeDeeeoiNvkjh4/e86JcQabJtrQnY0gR6qz9Y3poLE SFm8tgaUcGkXFuL9jig5wNXzfl5LKYX7uKFJ6eaoIeWyhwnGK2ccTY3+WxE/4ush ONffWpQRctK2vyDF2m7XEnXmJ2lRT6NAT7G60zAxGWe1S8j4zVNcdTIpMwSgT/lF V/KoVqLS/gzInG/wnDcEk6rALIo4hNKpsNHd+huoULb6vNLNy5Bcypj2jaeq3/b9 PHQCSVInwRjxpNvDVz+iNHwdSoaJfcgN1OGaHruJcersvGT9PWTLb3DgJ5E6xWPz wy/CLv/u6M1ompIvhzxsVDRRvrAZTRzbiL3UBAPz/e1zKZaiPOXvGIY5haeeLMHR CqAPAOnZMtiflZt2sXzomlx0BsN7IwmjFqh+sGb8SWHaQjzCbH1+ZJZ6NB9HjTmB dTthQ860aTUVUvuxdcIx =E/aI -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --ivb4ho1DMkABKInvX91KVWdiSGVTOnC6R--