From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Shaohua Li Subject: Re: [PATCH] md: make the code more readable in the for-loop Date: Sun, 8 May 2016 16:03:17 -0700 Message-ID: <20160508230317.GB8100@kernel.org> References: <318e71b0.3d4e.1549071292b.Coremail.kernelpatch@126.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <318e71b0.3d4e.1549071292b.Coremail.kernelpatch@126.com> Sender: linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Tiezhu Yang Cc: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-raid.ids On Sun, May 08, 2016 at 08:56:55PM +0800, Tiezhu Yang wrote: > This patch modifies raid1.c, raid10.c and raid5.c > to make the code more readable in the for-loop > and also fixes the scripts/checkpatch.pl error: > ERROR: trailing statements should be on next line. > > Signed-off-by: Tiezhu Yang > @@ -3573,7 +3573,8 @@ static void handle_stripe_dirtying(struct r5conf *conf, > pr_debug("force RCW rmw_level=%u, recovery_cp=%llu sh->sector=%llu\n", > conf->rmw_level, (unsigned long long)recovery_cp, > (unsigned long long)sh->sector); > - } else for (i = disks; i--; ) { > + } else > + for (i = disks - 1; i >= 0; i--) { > /* would I have to read this buffer for read_modify_write */ > struct r5dev *dev = &sh->dev[i]; > if ((dev->towrite || i == sh->pd_idx || i == sh->qd_idx) && Applied. I move the for statement to be in a {} of else statement.