[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <574C4C4F.8080609@emindsoft.com.cn>
Date: Mon, 30 May 2016 22:21:03 +0800
From: Chen Gang <chengang@...ndsoft.com.cn>
To: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
trivial@...nel.org
CC: kuleshovmail@...il.com, tony.luck@...el.com,
tangchen@...fujitsu.com, will.deacon@....com, holt@....com,
ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org, kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Chen Gang <gang.chen.5i5j@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH trivial] include/linux/memblock.h: Clean up code for several
trivial details
On 5/29/16 23:08, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Sun, 2016-05-29 at 22:36 +0800, chengang@...ndsoft.com.cn wrote:
>>
>> Use "!!" to let the boolean function return boolean value directly.
> []
>> diff --git a/include/linux/memblock.h b/include/linux/memblock.h
> []
>> @@ -191,12 +190,12 @@ static inline bool movable_node_is_enabled(void)
>>
>> static inline bool memblock_is_mirror(struct memblock_region *m)
>> {
>> - return m->flags & MEMBLOCK_MIRROR;
>> + return !!(m->flags & MEMBLOCK_MIRROR);
>
> These !! uses are't necessary.
> The compiler makes the bool return 0 or 1.
>
No, they are not necessary. But for me, it will be more clearer, since
in our kernel (at least in include/linux/), almost all Boolean functions
use Boolean value or expression for return (and "!!" are often used).
Please help check, and welcome any additional ideas, suggestions, and
completions.
Thanks.
--
Chen Gang (陈刚)
Managing Natural Environments is the Duty of Human Beings.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists