[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4cabddcc-c83c-483d-89db-996862f1f49c@youngman.org.uk>
Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2022 00:33:34 +0100
From: Wol <antlists@...ngman.org.uk>
To: Logan Gunthorpe <logang@...tatee.com>,
Paul Menzel <pmenzel@...gen.mpg.de>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-raid@...r.kernel.org,
Song Liu <song@...nel.org>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
Guoqing Jiang <guoqing.jiang@...ux.dev>,
Stephen Bates <sbates@...thlin.com>,
Martin Oliveira <Martin.Oliveira@...eticom.com>,
David Sloan <David.Sloan@...eticom.com>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 01/12] md/raid5: Factor out ahead_of_reshape() function
On 21/04/2022 17:05, Logan Gunthorpe wrote:
>> I like the ternary operator.;-)
>>
>> return mddev->reshape_backwards ? (return sector < reshape_sector) :
>> (sector >= reshape_sector)
>>
>> Sorry, does not matter.
> Yeah, I think plenty of people do not, though; it's harder to read with
> the long line and awkward to wrap.
>
I like the ternary too, but is there a superfluous return in there? That
would shorten the line. Or break it on the question mark - condition,
true, false all on their own lines.
Cheers,
Wol
Powered by blists - more mailing lists