From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Alex Elder Subject: [PATCH] libceph: re-phrase ceph_decode_need() Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2012 17:00:42 -0500 Message-ID: <4FFDF78A.7050606@inktank.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mail-yw0-f52.google.com ([209.85.213.52]:36249 "EHLO mail-yw0-f52.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1030192Ab2GKWAo (ORCPT ); Wed, 11 Jul 2012 18:00:44 -0400 Received: by yhpp61 with SMTP id p61so2049112yhp.11 for ; Wed, 11 Jul 2012 15:00:43 -0700 (PDT) Sender: ceph-devel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org For some reason, the way ceph_decode_need() is written throws me off whenever I look at it: if (!likely(ceph_has_room(p, end, n))) I read it as "not likely ceph has room," which is not what it really means. Despite being a double-negative, which I normally avoid, I like this better: if (unlikely(!ceph_has_room(p, end, n))) What do you think? Signed-off-by: Alex Elder --- include/linux/ceph/decode.h | 8 ++++---- 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) Index: b/include/linux/ceph/decode.h =================================================================== --- a/include/linux/ceph/decode.h +++ b/include/linux/ceph/decode.h @@ -51,10 +51,10 @@ static inline int ceph_has_room(void **p return end >= *p && n <= end - *p; } -#define ceph_decode_need(p, end, n, bad) \ - do { \ - if (!likely(ceph_has_room(p, end, n))) \ - goto bad; \ +#define ceph_decode_need(p, end, n, bad) \ + do { \ + if (unlikely(!ceph_has_room(p, end, n))) \ + goto bad; \ } while (0) #define ceph_decode_64_safe(p, end, v, bad) \