On Mon, 30 Jul 2007, David Brownell wrote:
> On Monday 30 July 2007, Alan Stern wrote:
> > +static inline int usb_urb_dir_in(struct urb *urb)
> > +{
> > + return (urb->transfer_flags & URB_DIR_MASK) != URB_DIR_OUT;
> > +}
>
> Clearer would be: == URB_DIR_IN ... or does that generate bad code?
I didn't actually check the generated code before submitting the patch.
A quick test with gcc 4.1.2 on x86 shows that the two sources give rise
to identical objects. I guess the same will probably be true on other
architectures too.
Okay, I'll change it.
Alan Stern
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop.
Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/
_______________________________________________
linux-usb-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
To unsubscribe, use the last form field at:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-usb-devel
