Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 04 Apr 2013 11:58:58 -0500 | From | Richard Kuo <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 4/6] Hexagon: check to if we will overflow the signal stack |
| |
On 04/04/2013 11:25 AM, Linas Vepstas wrote: > On 3 April 2013 19:02, Richard Kuo <rkuo@codeaurora.org> wrote: > >> + /* check if we would overflow the alt stack */ >> + if (on_sig_stack(sp) && !likely(on_sig_stack(sp - frame_size))) >> + return (void __user __force *)-1UL; > I found the !likely construction confusing, as its doing both a > 'unlikely' (right?) and inverting the argument. It seems clearer, > to idiots like me, to write this as: > > if (on_sig_stack(sp) && unlikely(!on_sig_stack(sp - frame_size))) > > since where checking for overflow, and its unlikely that the overflow happened. > > -- Linas
I'm not sure if putting a double negative in there will make it less not easy to understand...
--
Sent by an employee of the Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation
| |