On 22/03/2016 15:59, Alex Bennée wrote:
>> > + for (ptb1 = &tcg_ctx.tb_ctx.tb_phys_hash[h];
>> > + (tb = *ptb1) != NULL;
>> > + ptb1 = &tb->phys_hash_next) {
> I'm not sure I'm keen on the assignment in the for condition clause. I
> appreciate the cleansing of the if !tb return exit though. Could we be
> cleaner maybe? Here is my attempt:Sure, that would be just fine. Paolo
