Re: [PATCH 2/2] lib: revise list_sort() comment

[Olaf Titz]

> + * The comparison function @cmp must return a negative value if @a
> + * should sort before @b, and a positive value if @a should sort after
> + * @b. If @a and @b are equivalent, and their original relative
> + * ordering is to be preserved, @cmp should return 0; otherwise, the
> + * return value does not matter.

This "otherwise... does not matter" sounds funny and confusing. Either
read this as "the return value does not matter if it is neither <0, >0
or ==0" or "the return value does not matter if the function wants it
to be ignored". :-)

Just omitting the "otherwise" clause would be clearer.

Olaf
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/