[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <26031.1452558817@warthog.procyon.org.uk>
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2016 00:33:37 +0000
From: David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
To: Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
Cc: dhowells@...hat.com, chengang@...ndsoft.com.cn,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, nicolas.iooss_linux@....org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
Chen Gang <gang.chen.5i5j@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fs: dcache: Use bool return value instead of int
Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk> wrote:
> > -static inline int d_unhashed(const struct dentry *dentry)
> > +static inline bool d_unhashed(const struct dentry *dentry)
> > {
> > return hlist_bl_unhashed(&dentry->d_hash);
> > }
> >
> > -static inline int d_unlinked(const struct dentry *dentry)
> > +static inline bool d_unlinked(const struct dentry *dentry)
> > {
> > return d_unhashed(dentry) && !IS_ROOT(dentry);
> > }
>
> > -static inline int simple_positive(struct dentry *dentry)
> > +static inline bool simple_positive(struct dentry *dentry)
> > {
> > return d_really_is_positive(dentry) && !d_unhashed(dentry);
> > }
>
> And these three are harmless, but completely pointless...
gcc-5 does actually produce slightly smaller code when int returns are
replaced by bools under some circumstances within the kernel.
David
Powered by blists - more mailing lists