linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 4/6] kvm: Extend irqfd to support level interrupts

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 28 Jun 2012 15:41:33 +0300
From:	Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>
To:	Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@...hat.com>
CC:	"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, jan.kiszka@...mens.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/6] kvm: Extend irqfd to support level interrupts

On 06/28/2012 12:19 AM, Alex Williamson wrote:
>> > @@ -302,6 +385,7 @@ kvm_irqfd_deassign(struct kvm *kvm, struct kvm_irqfd *args)
>> >  {
>> >  	struct _irqfd *irqfd, *tmp;
>> >  	struct eventfd_ctx *eventfd;
>> > +	bool is_level = (args->flags & KVM_IRQFD_FLAG_LEVEL) != 0;
>> 
>> != 0 is not needed here I think.
> 
> Strictly, no it's not.  I just prefer to set bools from bools and I
> think Avi has commented on using !! before.

I prefer the naked version too, but != 0 is acceptable.
-- 
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/