On Mon, Feb 14, 2022 at 05:44:01PM +0100, Jan Beulich wrote: > On 01.02.2022 17:46, Roger Pau Monne wrote: > > + ASSERT(core->count <= c->x86_num_siblings); > > + if ((enable && core->count == 1) || > > + (!enable && core->count == 0)) > > Maybe simply "if ( core->count == enable )"? Or do compilers not like > comparisons with booleans?
I had it like that, but decided to switch to the current code just before sending because I think it's clearer. I didn't get complaints from compilers, but I felt it was kind of abusing to compare a boolean with and integer. If you wish I can restore to that form. Thanks, Roger.
