On 01.03.2023 12:51, Oleksii wrote:
> On Mon, 2023-02-27 at 13:59 +0100, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> On 24.02.2023 12:35, Oleksii Kurochko wrote:
>>> +{
>>> + if ( (insn & INSN_LENGTH_MASK) == INSN_LENGTH_32 )
>>> + return ( insn == BUG_INSN_32 );
>>> + else
>>> + return ( (insn & COMPRESSED_INSN_MASK) == BUG_INSN_16 );
>>
>> Nit (style): The kind-of-operand to return is an expression. Hence
>> you have stray blanks there immediately inside the parentheses.
>> (This is unlike e.g. if(), where you've formatted things correctly.)
> To be 100% sure, should it be:
> return ( ( insn & COMPRESSED_INSN_MASK ) == BUG_INSN_16 );
No, that's yet more spaces instead of fewer ones.
if ( (insn & INSN_LENGTH_MASK) == INSN_LENGTH_32 )
return insn == BUG_INSN_32;
else
return (insn & COMPRESSED_INSN_MASK) == BUG_INSN_16;
or, if you really want the extra parentheses:
if ( (insn & INSN_LENGTH_MASK) == INSN_LENGTH_32 )
return (insn == BUG_INSN_32);
else
return ((insn & COMPRESSED_INSN_MASK) == BUG_INSN_16);
(Personally I'd also omit the "else":
if ( (insn & INSN_LENGTH_MASK) == INSN_LENGTH_32 )
return insn == BUG_INSN_32;
return (insn & COMPRESSED_INSN_MASK) == BUG_INSN_16;
. Plus I don't think you really need to mask as much, i.e.
return insn == BUG_INSN_32 ||
(insn & COMPRESSED_INSN_MASK) == BUG_INSN_16;
would do as well afaict.)
Jan
