From: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>
To: chengang@emindsoft.com.cn, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
benh@kernel.crashing.org, paulus@samba.org
Cc: mpe@ellerman.id.au, tglx@linutronix.de, mingo@kernel.org,
linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Chen Gang <gang.chen.5i5j@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] include: mman: Use bool instead of int for the return value of arch_validate_prot
Date: Sun, 10 Jul 2016 16:47:49 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5782DEA5.600@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1468081751-9468-1-git-send-email-chengang@emindsoft.com.cn>
On 07/09/2016 09:29 AM, chengang@emindsoft.com.cn wrote:
> -static inline int arch_validate_prot(unsigned long prot)
> +static inline bool arch_validate_prot(unsigned long prot)
> {
> if (prot & ~(PROT_READ | PROT_WRITE | PROT_EXEC | PROT_SEM | PROT_SAO))
> - return 0;
> - if ((prot & PROT_SAO) && !cpu_has_feature(CPU_FTR_SAO))
> - return 0;
> - return 1;
> + return false;
> + return (prot & PROT_SAO) == 0 || cpu_has_feature(CPU_FTR_SAO);
> }
> #define arch_validate_prot(prot) arch_validate_prot(prot)
Please don't do things like this. They're not obviously correct and
also have no obvious benefit. You also don't mention why you bothered
to alter the logical structure of these checks.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-07-10 23:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-07-09 16:29 [PATCH] include: mman: Use bool instead of int for the return value of arch_validate_prot chengang
2016-07-10 23:47 ` Dave Hansen [this message]
[not found] ` <5783ED17.9010805@emindsoft.com.cn>
2016-07-12 4:20 ` Michael Ellerman
2016-07-12 16:53 ` Chen Gang
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=5782DEA5.600@linux.intel.com \
--to=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=chengang@emindsoft.com.cn \
--cc=gang.chen.5i5j@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
--cc=paulus@samba.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).