[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20110316141615.GA20706@ghostprotocols.net>
Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2011 11:16:15 -0300
From: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...hat.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: mingo@...hat.com, hpa@...or.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
fweisbec@...il.com, masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com,
tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...e.hu,
linux-tip-commits@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [tip:perf/core] perf probe: Clean up probe_point_lazy_walker()
return value
Em Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 08:59:17AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra escreveu:
> On Tue, 2011-03-15 at 23:18 +0000, tip-bot for Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> > perf probe: Clean up probe_point_lazy_walker() return value
>
> > --- a/tools/perf/util/probe-finder.c
> > +++ b/tools/perf/util/probe-finder.c
> > @@ -1328,7 +1328,7 @@ static int probe_point_lazy_walker(const char *fname, int lineno,
> > * Continue if no error, because the lazy pattern will match
> > * to other lines
> > */
> > - return ret < 0 ?: 0;
> > + return ret < 0 ? ret : 0;
> > }
>
> It is a slight change in semantics though, the return value will now be
> negative instead of 1. If its used as a boolean that's fine, but still.
>
> I'd have changed it to:
>
> return ret < 0;
>
> Which is identical to the previous statement.
Looks similar to the problem fixed in:
fbee632d0ca9f4073a3fefb9a843eac8af036b0f
for another function, I bet the intent in both cases was to return ret,
i.e. the negative value.
- Arnaldo
--
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