On Tue, Jun 09, 2015 at 11:08:31AM -0700, Richard Henderson wrote:
> On 06/04/2015 01:02 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 04/06/2015 08:19, Peter Crosthwaite wrote:
> >> On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 10:08 AM, Paolo Bonzini <pbonz...@redhat.com> wrote:
> >>> This is a required step to implement read_with_attrs and write_with_attrs.
> >>>
> >>> Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini <pbonz...@redhat.com>
> >>> ---
> >>> hw/block/pflash_cfi01.c | 96
> >>> ++++++-------------------------------------------
> >>
> >> Nice stats.
> >>
> >>> 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 86 deletions(-)
> >>>
> >>> diff --git a/hw/block/pflash_cfi01.c b/hw/block/pflash_cfi01.c
> >>> index 7507a15..0b3667a 100644
> >>> --- a/hw/block/pflash_cfi01.c
> >>> +++ b/hw/block/pflash_cfi01.c
> >>> @@ -650,101 +650,25 @@ static void pflash_write(pflash_t *pfl, hwaddr
> >>> offset,
> >>> }
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> -static uint32_t pflash_readb_be(void *opaque, hwaddr addr)
> >>> -{
> >>> - return pflash_read(opaque, addr, 1, 1);
> >>> -}
> >>> -
> >>> -static uint32_t pflash_readb_le(void *opaque, hwaddr addr)
> >>> -{
> >>> - return pflash_read(opaque, addr, 1, 0);
> >>> -}
> >>> -
> >>> -static uint32_t pflash_readw_be(void *opaque, hwaddr addr)
> >>> +static uint64_t pflash_mem_read(void *opaque, hwaddr addr, unsigned len)
> >>> {
> >>> pflash_t *pfl = opaque;
> >>> + bool be = !!(pfl->features & (1 << PFLASH_BE));
> >>
> >> !!() not needed. Otherwise
> >
> > I don't like magic bool-ification...
>
> I don't like !! just as much. If you don't like implicit conversion, then use
> != 0.
> > Is there a coding style item that
> > forbids this idiom in bool assignments?
>
> No. Indeed, nothing in coding style about bool at all.
>
>
> r~
Looks like it's a matter of taste.
FWIW I like !! or implicit conversions, and dislike != 0 as too verbose :)
--
MST
