From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <1494478535.2028.9.camel@perches.com>
References: <1494476871-26474-1-git-send-email-pushkar.iit@gmail.com>
 <1494477592.2028.7.camel@perches.com> <CAMvNc9AsahXxFsYo91VoW-YLLk9=BFE9j1BK-Bkm_ZQrvsS67w@mail.gmail.com>
 <1494478535.2028.9.camel@perches.com>
From: Pushkar Jambhlekar <pushkar.iit@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 11 May 2017 10:34:02 +0530
Message-ID: <CAMvNc9AKzs82zaHq1z+gAfsSu90PS_9N+L3VDEMdYDK0PbhA2A@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] FS: Fixing return type of unsigned_offsets
To: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>
Cc: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org>

If I remove '!!', sparse flags warning:

fs/read_write.c:38:29: warning: incorrect type in return expression
(different base types)
fs/read_write.c:38:29:    expected bool
fs/read_write.c:38:29:    got restricted fmode_t

It means explicit conversion is needed.

On Thu, May 11, 2017 at 10:25 AM, Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 2017-05-11 at 10:13 +0530, Pushkar Jambhlekar wrote:
>> Should I change my implementation, i.e. remove '!!'?
>
> That'd be up to Al.
>
> At least one implementation using similar bit comparisons
> in fs/*.c does not use !!
>
> fs/locks.c:static bool lease_breaking(struct file_lock *fl)
> fs/locks.c-{
> fs/locks.c-     return fl->fl_flags & (FL_UNLOCK_PENDING | FL_DOWNGRADE_PENDING)
> fs/locks.c-}
>
> I didn't look very hard.



-- 
Jambhlekar Pushkar Arun