[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <18234.24461.192099.360005@notabene.brown>
Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2007 13:38:05 +1100
From: Neil Brown <neilb@...e.de>
To: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
Cc: linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
"J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@...ldses.org>, nfs@...ts.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH] - [9/15] - remove defconfig ptr comparisons to 0 - fs/nfsd
On Tuesday November 13, joe@...ches.com wrote:
> Remove defconfig ptr comparison to 0
>
> Remove sparse warning: Using plain integer as NULL pointer
>
> Signed-off-by: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
>
> ---
>
> diff --git a/fs/nfsd/vfs.c b/fs/nfsd/vfs.c
> index d019918..07b38cf 100644
> --- a/fs/nfsd/vfs.c
> +++ b/fs/nfsd/vfs.c
> @@ -987,7 +987,7 @@ nfsd_vfs_write(struct svc_rqst *rqstp, struct svc_fh *fhp, struct file *file,
> * flushing the data to disk is handled separately below.
> */
>
> - if (file->f_op->fsync == 0) {/* COMMIT3 cannot work */
> + if (!file->f_op->fsync) {/* COMMIT3 cannot work */
> stable = 2;
> *stablep = 2; /* FILE_SYNC */
> }
>
Personally, I would much rather these were changed to "== NULL".
Different people have different preferences on whether to use
! foo
or
foo == NULL
and the person who wrote that code is presumably showing a preference
for the later. Changing it from "== 0" to "== NULL" is clearly a
valuable improvement. Changing from "== 0" to "! " is a stylistic
change that should not be made lightly.
I personally often use and prefer the explicit comparison to NULL.
NeilBrown
-
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists