Davide Libenzi wrote:
quoted text
> On Tue, 25 Sep 2007, roel wrote:
> 
>>> +	if (!(ap->flags & ATA_FLAG_IPM) || !ata_dev_enabled(dev)) {
>> 	if (!((ap->flags & ATA_FLAG_IPM) && ata_dev_enabled(dev))) {
> 
> int foo(int i, int j) {
>         
>         return !(i & 8) || !j;
> }
> 
> int moo(int i, int j) {
>         
>         return !((i & 8) && j);
> }
> 
> 
> gcc -O2 -S:
> 
> 
> .globl foo
>         .type   foo, @function
> foo:
>         shrl    , %edi
>         xorl    , %edi
>         testl   %esi, %esi
>         sete    %al
>         orl     %eax, %edi
>         andl    , %edi
>         movl    %edi, %eax
>         ret
> .globl moo
>         .type   moo, @function
> moo:
>         shrl    , %edi
>         xorl    , %edi
>         testl   %esi, %esi
>         sete    %al
>         orl     %eax, %edi
>         andl    , %edi
>         movl    %edi, %eax
>         ret

Indeed, no difference, except for the eye. 

do you not consider it an improvement or do you not want to change it?
or
don't you consider it an improvement and want to change it?

Never mind. Disregard if you please.

quoted text
> - Davide

-
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/