Messages in this thread | | | From | Linus Torvalds <> | Date | Fri, 13 Mar 2020 17:40:03 -0700 | Subject | Re: [RFC][PATCH v4 20/69] merging pick_link() with get_link(), part 2 |
| |
Hmm..
On Fri, Mar 13, 2020 at 4:55 PM Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk> wrote: >@@ -2370,10 +2375,9 @@ static int path_lookupat(struct nameidata *nd, unsigned flags, struct path *path > + while (!(err = link_path_walk(s, nd)) && > + (s = lookup_last(nd)) != NULL) > + ;
There's two copies of that loop (the other being in path_openat()). Is there a reason why it's written that odd way?
Why is the loop body empty, when the *natural* way to write that would seem to be
while (!(err = link_path_walk(s, nd))) { s = lookup_last(nd)); if (!s) break; }
which may be a few lines longer, but a lot more legible.
I don't think you should use assignments in tests, unless strictly required. Yes, that "err = ..." part almost has to be written that way, but the "s = ..." part doesn't seem to have any reason for being in the conditional.
And I'm only reading the patches, so once again: maybe I'm messing up by mis-reading something. And maybe you have some reason for that pattern.
Linus
| |