> From: Stephen Hemminger [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Monday, 16 February 2026 01.48 > > On Sun, 15 Feb 2026 22:45:53 +0100 > Morten Brørup <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Stephen Hemminger <[email protected]> > > > --- > > > drivers/net/tap/rte_eth_tap.c | 7 +++++-- > > > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/net/tap/rte_eth_tap.c > > > b/drivers/net/tap/rte_eth_tap.c > > > index aa236cf967..31c8c185e9 100644 > > > --- a/drivers/net/tap/rte_eth_tap.c > > > +++ b/drivers/net/tap/rte_eth_tap.c > > > @@ -154,8 +154,11 @@ tun_alloc(struct pmd_internals *pmd, int > > > is_keepalive, int persistent) > > > * Do not set IFF_NO_PI as packet information header will be > > > needed > > > * to check if a received packet has been truncated. > > > */ > > > - ifr.ifr_flags = (pmd->type == ETH_TUNTAP_TYPE_TAP) ? > > > - IFF_TAP : IFF_TUN | IFF_POINTOPOINT; > > > > For unconditional assignment, I prefer ternary expression over > if/else. > > If you want to improve readability instead of relying on operator > precedence, suggest: > > > > ifr.ifr_flags = (pmd->type == ETH_TUNTAP_TYPE_TAP) ? > > IFF_TAP : (IFF_TUN | IFF_POINTOPOINT); > > > I was pre-conditioned by MS style guide lines that always called out > excessive use of ternary as confusing
Just tested on Godbolt; GCC, Clang and MSVC emits similar code for ternary and if/else, so it's only a matter of preference. Since it's an unconditional assignment, I prefer ternary. Ternary also works when initializing a variable with its declaration. And with assigning field values to structures. Well... it's your code, so I'll leave you with the decision. ;-)
