lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Jan]   [21]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH -v7 2/2] Update ctime and mtime for memory-mapped files
On 22/01/2008, Anton Salikhmetov <salikhmetov@gmail.com> wrote:
> 2008/1/22, Jesper Juhl <jesper.juhl@gmail.com>:
> > On 22/01/2008, Anton Salikhmetov <salikhmetov@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > 2008/1/22, Jesper Juhl <jesper.juhl@gmail.com>:
> > > > Some very pedantic nitpicking below;
> > > >
> > > > On 22/01/2008, Anton Salikhmetov <salikhmetov@gmail.com> wrote:
> > ...
> > > > > + if (file && (vma->vm_flags & VM_SHARED)) {
> > > > > + if (flags & MS_ASYNC)
> > > > > + vma_wrprotect(vma);
> > > > > + if (flags & MS_SYNC) {
> > > >
> > > > "else if" ??
> > >
> > > The MS_ASYNC and MS_SYNC flags are mutually exclusive, that is why I
> > > did not use the "else-if" here. Moreover, this function itself checks
> > > that they never come together.
> > >
> >
> > I would say that them being mutually exclusive would be a reason *for*
> > using "else-if" here.
>
> This check is performed by the sys_msync() function itself in its very
> beginning.
>
> We don't need to check it later.
>

Sure, it's just that, to me, using 'else-if' makes it explicit that
the two are mutually exclusive. Using "if (...), if (...)" doesn't.
Maybe it's just me, but I feel that 'else-if' here better shows the
intention... No big deal.

--
Jesper Juhl <jesper.juhl@gmail.com>
Don't top-post http://www.catb.org/~esr/jargon/html/T/top-post.html
Plain text mails only, please http://www.expita.com/nomime.html


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2008-01-22 03:21    [W:0.045 / U:2.628 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site