[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ca988eaa-74aa-8677-a879-11f4edf1039a@huawei.com>
Date: Mon, 9 Oct 2017 09:48:24 +0800
From: Chao Yu <yuchao0@...wei.com>
To: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>,
Ju Hyung Park <qkrwngud825@...il.com>,
Thomas Meyer <thomas@...3r.de>
CC: "jaegeuk@...nel.org" <jaegeuk@...nel.org>,
<linux-f2fs-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH] f2fs: Fix bool initialization/comparison
On 2017/10/8 3:30, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Sat, 2017-10-07 at 23:33 +0900, Ju Hyung Park wrote:
>> Isn't this bogus?
>>
>> "bool" type in Linux kernel is a typedef to "_Bool"
>> and true/false is defined as 1 and 0 by enum at include/linux/stddef.h.
>
> Bogus? Well, not really. It's just a neatening and it's
> identical object code.
>
> The idea is that true/false is more intelligible than 1/0
> for a human reader.
Yes, that's just cleanup.
Hi Thomas, could you change the commit message a bit?
>
>> On Sat, Oct 7, 2017 at 11:02 PM, Thomas Meyer <thomas@...3r.de> wrote:
>>> Bool initializations should use true and false. Bool tests don't need
>>> comparisons.
> []
>>> diff -u -p a/fs/f2fs/data.c b/fs/f2fs/data.c
> []
>>> @@ -419,7 +419,7 @@ next:
>>> bio_page = fio->encrypted_page ? fio->encrypted_page : fio->page;
>>>
>>> /* set submitted = 1 as a return value */
Comment should be updated too.
Thanks,
>>> - fio->submitted = 1;
>>> + fio->submitted = true;
>>>
>>> inc_page_count(sbi, WB_DATA_TYPE(bio_page));
>>>
>
> And it's probably better to change the comment too.
>
>
> .
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists