| Message ID | 1458871286-3099-1-git-send-email-baiyaowei@cmss.chinamobile.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
On Fri, Mar 25, 2016 at 10:01:26AM +0800, Yaowei Bai wrote: > This patch refactors __mnt_is_readonly and makes it return bool to > improve readability due to this particular function only using either > one or zero as its return value. Improve in which way, if I may ask? -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On Sat, Mar 26, 2016 at 12:43:32AM +0000, Al Viro wrote: > On Fri, Mar 25, 2016 at 10:01:26AM +0800, Yaowei Bai wrote: > > This patch refactors __mnt_is_readonly and makes it return bool to > > improve readability due to this particular function only using either > > one or zero as its return value. > > Improve in which way, if I may ask? A boolean return value can be more matchable with function's name and more suitable as this function only returns 0/1. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 8:35 AM, Yaowei Bai <baiyaowei@cmss.chinamobile.com> wrote: > On Sat, Mar 26, 2016 at 12:43:32AM +0000, Al Viro wrote: >> On Fri, Mar 25, 2016 at 10:01:26AM +0800, Yaowei Bai wrote: >> > This patch refactors __mnt_is_readonly and makes it return bool to >> > improve readability due to this particular function only using either >> > one or zero as its return value. >> >> Improve in which way, if I may ask? > > A boolean return value can be more matchable with function's name and > more suitable as this function only returns 0/1. Please also think of the arguments made on linux-mtd[1]. Hopping from one subsystem to another trying to sneak patches in is not the best idea... :-) [1]: http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-mtd/2016-March/066296.html
On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 11:43:21AM +0200, Richard Weinberger wrote: > On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 8:35 AM, Yaowei Bai > <baiyaowei@cmss.chinamobile.com> wrote: > > On Sat, Mar 26, 2016 at 12:43:32AM +0000, Al Viro wrote: > >> On Fri, Mar 25, 2016 at 10:01:26AM +0800, Yaowei Bai wrote: > >> > This patch refactors __mnt_is_readonly and makes it return bool to > >> > improve readability due to this particular function only using either > >> > one or zero as its return value. > >> > >> Improve in which way, if I may ask? > > > > A boolean return value can be more matchable with function's name and > > more suitable as this function only returns 0/1. > > Please also think of the arguments made on linux-mtd[1]. > Hopping from one subsystem to another trying to sneak patches > in is not the best idea... :-) Acturally, this patch was sent before the mtd ones and all of them were sent in one shot. You're really thinking too much.:-) > > [1]: http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-mtd/2016-March/066296.html > > -- > Thanks, > //richard -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Am 30.03.2016 um 03:23 schrieb Yaowei Bai: > On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 11:43:21AM +0200, Richard Weinberger wrote: >> On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 8:35 AM, Yaowei Bai >> <baiyaowei@cmss.chinamobile.com> wrote: >>> On Sat, Mar 26, 2016 at 12:43:32AM +0000, Al Viro wrote: >>>> On Fri, Mar 25, 2016 at 10:01:26AM +0800, Yaowei Bai wrote: >>>>> This patch refactors __mnt_is_readonly and makes it return bool to >>>>> improve readability due to this particular function only using either >>>>> one or zero as its return value. >>>> >>>> Improve in which way, if I may ask? >>> >>> A boolean return value can be more matchable with function's name and >>> more suitable as this function only returns 0/1. >> >> Please also think of the arguments made on linux-mtd[1]. >> Hopping from one subsystem to another trying to sneak patches >> in is not the best idea... :-) > > Acturally, this patch was sent before the mtd ones and all of them were sent > in one shot. You're really thinking too much.:-) I was referring to your answer not to your patch. Thanks, //richard -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
diff --git a/fs/namespace.c b/fs/namespace.c index 4fb1691..4f2facd 100644 --- a/fs/namespace.c +++ b/fs/namespace.c @@ -271,13 +271,10 @@ out_free_cache: * mnt_want/drop_write() will _keep_ the filesystem * r/w. */ -int __mnt_is_readonly(struct vfsmount *mnt) +bool __mnt_is_readonly(struct vfsmount *mnt) { - if (mnt->mnt_flags & MNT_READONLY) - return 1; - if (mnt->mnt_sb->s_flags & MS_RDONLY) - return 1; - return 0; + return mnt->mnt_flags & MNT_READONLY || + mnt->mnt_sb->s_flags & MS_RDONLY; } EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(__mnt_is_readonly); diff --git a/include/linux/mount.h b/include/linux/mount.h index f822c3c..c143e15 100644 --- a/include/linux/mount.h +++ b/include/linux/mount.h @@ -80,7 +80,7 @@ extern void mnt_drop_write_file(struct file *file); extern void mntput(struct vfsmount *mnt); extern struct vfsmount *mntget(struct vfsmount *mnt); extern struct vfsmount *mnt_clone_internal(struct path *path); -extern int __mnt_is_readonly(struct vfsmount *mnt); +extern bool __mnt_is_readonly(struct vfsmount *mnt); struct path; extern struct vfsmount *clone_private_mount(struct path *path);
This patch refactors __mnt_is_readonly and makes it return bool to improve readability due to this particular function only using either one or zero as its return value. No functional change. Signed-off-by: Yaowei Bai <baiyaowei@cmss.chinamobile.com> --- fs/namespace.c | 9 +++------ include/linux/mount.h | 2 +- 2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)