Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH 04/22] staging: lustre: osc: handle osc eviction correctly | From | Oleg Drokin <> | Date | Mon, 5 Dec 2016 18:03:58 -0500 |
| |
On Dec 5, 2016, at 3:55 PM, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 02, 2016 at 07:53:11PM -0500, James Simmons wrote: >> @@ -3183,8 +3182,10 @@ static int discard_cb(const struct lu_env *env, struct cl_io *io, >> /* page is top page. */ >> info->oti_next_index = osc_index(ops) + 1; >> if (cl_page_own(env, io, page) == 0) { >> - KLASSERT(ergo(page->cp_type == CPT_CACHEABLE, >> - !PageDirty(cl_page_vmpage(page)))); >> + if (!ergo(page->cp_type == CPT_CACHEABLE, >> + !PageDirty(cl_page_vmpage(page)))) >> + CL_PAGE_DEBUG(D_ERROR, env, page, >> + "discard dirty page?\n"); > > > I don't understand the point of the ergo macro. There are way too many > double negatives (some of them hidden for my small brain). How is that > simpler than just writing it out: > > if (page->cp_type == CPT_CACHEABLE && > PageDirty(cl_page_vmpage(page)) > CL_PAGE_DEBUG(D_ERROR, env, page, "discard dirty page?\n");
I guess it makes it sound chic or something? I am not a huge fan of it either, esp. in a case like this, though it might be somewhat more convenient in assertions (where this is converted from).
| |