linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 30 Oct 2007 17:41:25 +0100
From:	Richard Knutsson <ricknu-0@...dent.ltu.se>
To:	Denys Vlasenko <vda.linux@...glemail.com>
CC:	James.Bottomley@...eleye.com, James.Smart@...lex.com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_hw.h: Some minor cleanup.

Denys Vlasenko wrote:
> On Tuesday 30 October 2007 10:54, Richard Knutsson wrote:
>   
>> Signed-off-by: Richard Knutsson <ricknu-0@...dent.ltu.se>
>> ---
>> Diffed against linus-git
>> Checked with script/checkpatch.pl
>>
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_hw.h b/drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_hw.h
>> index 451accd..6f56528 100644
>> --- a/drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_hw.h
>> +++ b/drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_hw.h
>> @@ -3158,31 +3158,30 @@ struct lpfc_sli2_slim {
>>   *
>>   * Parameters:
>>   * device : struct pci_dev 's device field
>> - *
>> - * return 1 => TRUE
>> - *        0 => FALSE
>>   */
>> -static inline int
>> +static inline bool
>>  lpfc_is_LC_HBA(unsigned short device)
>>  {
>> -	if ((device == PCI_DEVICE_ID_TFLY) ||
>> -	    (device == PCI_DEVICE_ID_PFLY) ||
>> -	    (device == PCI_DEVICE_ID_LP101) ||
>> -	    (device == PCI_DEVICE_ID_BMID) ||
>> -	    (device == PCI_DEVICE_ID_BSMB) ||
>> -	    (device == PCI_DEVICE_ID_ZMID) ||
>> -	    (device == PCI_DEVICE_ID_ZSMB) ||
>> -	    (device == PCI_DEVICE_ID_RFLY))
>> -		return 1;
>> -	else
>> -		return 0;
>> +	switch (device) {
>> +	case PCI_DEVICE_ID_TFLY:
>> +	case PCI_DEVICE_ID_PFLY:
>> +	case PCI_DEVICE_ID_LP101:
>> +	case PCI_DEVICE_ID_BMID:
>> +	case PCI_DEVICE_ID_BSMB:
>> +	case PCI_DEVICE_ID_ZMID:
>> +	case PCI_DEVICE_ID_ZSMB:
>> +	case PCI_DEVICE_ID_RFLY:
>> +		return true;
>> +	}
>> +
>> +	return false;
>>  }
>>     
>
> Why is this patch useful? 
Just simpler to read, no?
> I'd rather do this instead:
>
> -static inline int
> +static int
>
> (this function has three callsites, thus de-inlining will
> make code smaller)
>   
It is returning (and the results are used as) a boolean so why should it 
be an integer? But I have no objection to de-inline it.
Alright with:
-static inline int
+static bool
?

Richard Knutsson

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