From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.1 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 24D2FC4646D for ; Mon, 6 Aug 2018 19:06:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D17D721A29 for ; Mon, 6 Aug 2018 19:06:47 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="l5MHWaNH" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org D17D721A29 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1732857AbeHFVRO (ORCPT ); Mon, 6 Aug 2018 17:17:14 -0400 Received: from mail-ua0-f193.google.com ([209.85.217.193]:37219 "EHLO mail-ua0-f193.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1728198AbeHFVRN (ORCPT ); Mon, 6 Aug 2018 17:17:13 -0400 Received: by mail-ua0-f193.google.com with SMTP id y10-v6so13411166uao.4; Mon, 06 Aug 2018 12:06:45 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=kQmupFj6wki3WKHYFu5y7WPu+tUN8me/ZT0QDlj+oYo=; b=l5MHWaNHExGL2JUXtin+Kx0ajAQgHtadk1NyGIrdyyjEdKGuKeUyQlAH5K4Hv539/5 9YwdcfVwnmNw1hym2lyVzFDs7/G8ufZQ2k3Hf8K7AJx0Wy9EX2lCKuC6u4Kg3mP6BulV LVCxMfqmV+QpjgVAnw3gUNNriJ4Gx4qyw3vbH4g9W6+zUsFcEDujI83Sipdwl2WSO+nJ mx9+VbdG/VcpnNqGy+ipWaHchXX4iZdfjrs+76ThotO2I7GG/Y52wGdR7teU09G6soBv 9l5jz9Gdq5DgeMId3uQ2gAl61RRrTj2tBrfb3fYB4UV0rOSUF3tLgbLHUaKO5P5IOn1y kMig== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=kQmupFj6wki3WKHYFu5y7WPu+tUN8me/ZT0QDlj+oYo=; b=bU+7gJZ8nvCnP81DPrVs76rxaIFZLVnrzUCJhpPqGi0HI2tJqkHUFJBny8lqgccTmO u5nLdp7QrfEmtmOScq+6J78M9VEStm6xDhS95MqBE2krbcSsgTMkiOVxulPZ9z0/TXTX fbP0sIPBnIzDG/d3zeVo8X6H4fZVA3h2Iat3eC25OdTH6yw+gENlZmxXs8t4ixhXkxPH 4RtyXIFBP2KgeRIfECGTDj4s8a5uOSgHSQmx0eAKQTS6z1bc9AOJ8+XeIv8AobhKSZzQ 8qoE+MbtRmwIUv/6AHqlax4zJFL04FM3xRk1d5dTI6bliRPaGHF2nOYeU/gM3Ve+Bn9J YsNg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOUpUlGEQra5WRjIZeDzh+E9ZvrgwGRiSnx5/dZizP8iK9+NCJ1gvhB1 b3wau+wIvOUEBlD/BNMaZJqyDDjlVaerAoHUW0mgPSla X-Google-Smtp-Source: AAOMgpcc/OsWPTxSZMNfIwjsI277G846Hl/47fsmhuPvoXdYcGTco+obd9ysOP+2HWuG+A71K1whTdNrFxHi1Z/GB2c= X-Received: by 2002:ab0:4c24:: with SMTP id l36-v6mr11232472uaf.199.1533582405100; Mon, 06 Aug 2018 12:06:45 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 2002:a67:2149:0:0:0:0:0 with HTTP; Mon, 6 Aug 2018 12:06:44 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <20180805001839.GA22975@embeddedor.com> From: Andy Shevchenko Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2018 22:06:44 +0300 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] platform/x86: acer-wmi: use true and false for boolean values To: Joe Perches Cc: David Laight , "Gustavo A. R. Silva" , "Lee, Chun-Yi" , Darren Hart , Andy Shevchenko , Platform Driver , Linux Kernel Mailing List Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Aug 6, 2018 at 7:42 PM, Joe Perches wrote: > On Mon, 2018-08-06 at 16:41 +0000, David Laight wrote: >> From: Andy Shevchenko >> > Sent: 05 August 2018 11:26 >> > > static bool has_cap(u32 cap) >> > > { >> > > if ((interface->capability & cap) != 0) >> > > - return 1; >> > > + return true; >> > > >> > > - return 0; >> > > + return false; >> > > } >> > >> > this entire function can be oneliner: >> > >> > return !!(...); >> >> Why the !! ?? Just: >> return (interface->capability & cap) != 0; > > Because the return is bool you don't need the !! either. > The compiler does that. True, I use that pattern, but in most cases the return value is int and this is just to guarantee the 0,1 possible range. -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko