Re: [PATCH] net/bonding: adjust codingstyle for bond_3ad files.

Nicolas Kaiser
2011-05-06T13:01:14Z

* Rafael Aquini <aquini@linux.com>:
> While I was studying what bond_3ad has under its hood, I realized its coding
> style did not follow all Documentation/CodingStyle recommendations. As a tiny
> collaboration I did some mods there, in an attempt to make that code stick as
> closely as possible with Kernel's coding style.
> Modifications:
> * switched all comments from C99-style to C89-style.
> * replaced MAC_ADDRESS_COMPARE macro for compare_ether_addr()
>
> Signed-off-by: Rafael Aquini <aquini@linux.com>
> ---
> drivers/net/bonding/bond_3ad.c | 836 +++++++++++++++++++++++-----------------
> drivers/net/bonding/bond_3ad.h | 195 +++++-----
> 2 files changed, 579 insertions(+), 452 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/bonding/bond_3ad.c b/drivers/net/bonding/bond_3ad.c
> index 31912f1..fdb07be 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/bonding/bond_3ad.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/bonding/bond_3ad.c

(..)

> @@ -1533,16 +1596,15 @@ static void ad_agg_selection_logic(struct aggregator *agg)
>
> if (best &&
> __get_agg_selection_mode(best->lag_ports) = BOND_AD_STABLE) {
> - /*
> - * For the STABLE policy, don't replace the old active
> - * aggregator if it's still active (it has an answering
> - * partner) or if both the best and active don't have an
> - * answering partner.
> +
> + /* For the STABLE policy, don't replace the old active
> + * aggregator if it's still active (it has an answering partner)
> + * or if both the best and active don't have answering partners
> */
> if (active && active->lag_ports &&
> active->lag_ports->is_enabled &&
> (__agg_has_partner(active) ||
> - (!__agg_has_partner(active) && !__agg_has_partner(best)))) {
> + (!__agg_has_partner(active) && !__agg_has_partner(best)))) {
> if (!(!active->actor_oper_aggregator_key &&
> best->actor_oper_aggregator_key)) {
> best = NULL;

The indentation of parentheses looks correct to me in the original version.
However, this expression can also be simplified like

if (active && active->lag_ports &&
active->lag_ports->is_enabled &&
- (__agg_has_partner(active) ||
- (!__agg_has_partner(active) && !__agg_has_partner(best)))) {
+ (__agg_has_partner(active) || !__agg_has_partner(best))) {
if (!(!active->actor_oper_aggregator_key &&
best->actor_oper_aggregator_key)) {
best = NULL;

Last October I submitted such a patch which also simplified the
double negation in the subsequent expression.

Best regards,
Nicolas Kaiser