Re: [PATCH] KVM: X86: correct meaningless kvm_apicv_activated() check

[Sean Christopherson]

On Mon, Mar 16, 2020 at 09:33:50AM +0100, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote:
> Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> > +	if ((old == 0) == (new == 0))
> > +		return;
> 
> This is a very laconic expression I personally find hard to read :-)
> 
> 	/* Check if WE actually changed APICv state */
>         if ((!old && !new) || (old && new))
> 		return;
> 
> would be my preference (not strong though, I read yours several times
> and now I feel like I understand it just fine :-)

Or maybe this to avoid so many equals signs?

	if (!old == !new)
		return;