Re: [PATCH] remove __mark_buffer_dirty and related changes

From: Russell King (rmk@arm.linux.org.uk)
Date: Fri Dec 29 2000 - 05:31:23 EST

Marcelo Tosatti writes:
> +int mark_buffer_dirty(struct buffer_head *bh)
> {
> + if (!atomic_set_buffer_dirty(bh)) {
> + return 1;
> + }
> + return 0;
> }

Any particular reason why you don't to:

        return !atomic_set_buffer_dirty(bh);

which generates better code on some systems?
   _____
  |_____| ------------------------------------------------- ---+---+-
  | | Russell King rmk@arm.linux.org.uk --- ---
  | | | | http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/personal/aboutme.html / / |
  | +-+-+ --- -+-
  / | THE developer of ARM Linux |+| /|\
 / | | | --- |
    +-+-+ ------------------------------------------------- /\\\ |
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Dec 31 2000 - 21:00:12 EST