Re: + x86-move-vsyscall-page-out-of-fixmap-above-stack-tidy.patch added to -mm tree

Re: + x86-move-vsyscall-page-out-of-fixmap-above-stack-tidy.patch added to -mm tree

[Chris Wedgwood]

On Sun, May 21, 2006 at 02:51:54AM -0700, akpm@osdl.org wrote:

> -	if ((ret = insert_vm_struct(mm, vma))) {
> +	ret = insert_vm_struct(mm, vma);
> +	if (ret) {

Urgh.

It's not really any cleaner/clearer so why do that?

Re: + x86-move-vsyscall-page-out-of-fixmap-above-stack-tidy.patch added to -mm tree

[Andrew Morton]

Chris Wedgwood <cw@f00f.org> wrote:
>
> On Sun, May 21, 2006 at 02:51:54AM -0700, akpm@osdl.org wrote:
> 
> > -	if ((ret = insert_vm_struct(mm, vma))) {
> > +	ret = insert_vm_struct(mm, vma);
> > +	if (ret) {
> 
> Urgh.
> 
> It's not really any cleaner/clearer so why do that?
>

Because it's cleaner and clearer and because Linus said.

One is an assignment and the other is a test.  These have nothing to do
with each other.

Keep it simple.

Re: + x86-move-vsyscall-page-out-of-fixmap-above-stack-tidy.patch added to -mm tree

[Chris Wedgwood]

On Sun, May 21, 2006 at 05:09:51AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:

> Because it's cleaner and clearer

some would disagree

> and because Linus said.

ok, sure, that works (i don't personally agree, but if there is
contention it's best that someone just stands up and says "because i
said so")

> One is an assignment and the other is a test.  These have nothing to
> do with each other.

should there be a comment in codingstyle about this then perhaps?