| To: | David Binderman <linuxdev.baldrick@xxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: xfs_icache.c:1298]: (style) Redundant condition |
| From: | Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Sun, 31 Jul 2016 23:32:08 -0700 |
| Cc: | david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, dcb314@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| Delivered-to: | xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <CAMzoamagYyR5x4UWfLb1HZ5zf4ZYQzEpTC8Q-89gd0pA4dTK5g@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| References: | <CAMzoamagYyR5x4UWfLb1HZ5zf4ZYQzEpTC8Q-89gd0pA4dTK5g@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| User-agent: | Mutt/1.6.1 (2016-04-27) |
On Mon, Jul 25, 2016 at 04:13:28PM +0100, David Binderman wrote: > Hello there, > > linux-4.7/fs/xfs/xfs_icache.c:1298]: (style) Redundant condition: > eofb. '!eofb || (eofb && eofb.eof_scan_owner!=0)' is equivalent to > '!eofb || eofb.eof_scan_owner!=0' > > Source code is > > ASSERT(!eofb || (eofb && eofb->eof_scan_owner != 0)); > > Maybe better code > > ASSERT(!eofb || (eofb->eof_scan_owner != 0)); Yes, that would be better. But it's probably not worth changing existing code just for that. |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: [PATCH] vfs: cap dedupe request structure size at PAGE_SIZE, Christoph Hellwig |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: [PATCH 01/47] vfs: fix return type of ioctl_file_dedupe_range, Christoph Hellwig |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [PATCH] vfs: cap dedupe request structure size at PAGE_SIZE, Christoph Hellwig |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [PATCH 01/47] vfs: fix return type of ioctl_file_dedupe_range, Christoph Hellwig |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |