[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ZEJQ8JxeiZ1sxTqP@corigine.com>
Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2023 11:01:36 +0200
From: Simon Horman <simon.horman@...igine.com>
To: Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@....com>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Michal Kubecek <mkubecek@...e.cz>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
Claudiu Manoil <claudiu.manoil@....com>,
Xiaoliang Yang <xiaoliang.yang_1@....com>,
Petr Machata <petrm@...dia.com>,
Danielle Ratson <danieller@...dia.com>,
Pranavi Somisetty <pranavi.somisetty@....com>,
Harini Katakam <harini.katakam@....com>,
Vinicius Costa Gomes <vinicius.gomes@...el.com>,
Kurt Kanzenbach <kurt@...utronix.de>,
Gerhard Engleder <gerhard@...leder-embedded.com>,
Ferenc Fejes <ferenc.fejes@...csson.com>,
Aaron Conole <aconole@...hat.com>,
linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 net-next 1/9] net: enetc: fix MAC Merge layer
remaining enabled until a link down event
On Thu, Apr 20, 2023 at 08:03:54PM +0300, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 20, 2023 at 04:22:04PM +0200, Simon Horman wrote:
> > > - /* If link is up, enable MAC Merge right away */
> > > - if (!!(priv->active_offloads & ENETC_F_QBU) &&
> > > - !(val & ENETC_MMCSR_LINK_FAIL))
> > > - val |= ENETC_MMCSR_ME;
> > > + /* If link is up, enable/disable MAC Merge right away */
> > > + if (!(val & ENETC_MMCSR_LINK_FAIL)) {
> > > + if (!!(priv->active_offloads & ENETC_F_QBU))
> >
> > nit: The !!() seems unnecessary,
> > I wonder if it can be written in a simpler way as:
> >
> > if (priv->active_offloads & ENETC_F_QBU)
>
> I agree. Normally I omit the double negation in simple statements like this.
> Here I didn't, because the expression was split into 2 "if" conditions,
> and I kept the individual terms as-is for some reason.
>
> Since the generated object code is absolutely the same either way, I would not
> resend just for minor style comments such as this one, if you don't mind.
> However, I do appreciate the review and I'll pay more attention to this
> detail in the future.
Thanks. I agree the result should be same.
No need to resend because of this.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists