Re: [PATCH] x86/UV: Fix conditional in gru_exit

[Ingo Molnar]

* Dimitri Sivanich <sivanich@xxxxxxx> wrote:

> On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 08:55:49AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > > -	if (!is_uv_system())
> > > +	if (!is_uv_system() || (is_uvx_hub() && !is_uv2_hub()))
> > >  		return;
> > 
> > Such an amalgation of three system specific conditionals is 
> > disgusting, please at minimum factor out a helper routine so that such 
> > mismatches cannot happen.
> >
> Agreed.  Here's a new patch.
> 
> 
> Fix supported system conditional in gru_exit.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Dimitri Sivanich <sivanich@xxxxxxx>
> ---
>  drivers/misc/sgi-gru/grufile.c |    8 ++++++--
>  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> Index: linux/drivers/misc/sgi-gru/grufile.c
> ===================================================================
> --- linux.orig/drivers/misc/sgi-gru/grufile.c
> +++ linux/drivers/misc/sgi-gru/grufile.c
> @@ -58,6 +58,10 @@ static int max_user_cbrs, max_user_dsr_b
>  
>  static struct miscdevice gru_miscdev;
>  
> +static int gru_unsupported(void)
> +{
> +	return !is_uv_system() || (is_uvx_hub() && !is_uv2_hub());
> +}

So the usual pattern is to introduce simple patterns, without logic 
operations in their name. I.e. "gru_supported()" would be more natural 
than "gru_not_supported()" or gru_unsupported()".

Thanks,

	Ingo
--
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/