Re: [PATCH] Fix cpuset sched_relax_domain_level control file
From: Andrew Morton
Date: Wed May 07 2008 - 11:09:48 EST
On Wed, 7 May 2008 12:48:09 +0300 Adrian Bunk <bunk@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Tue, May 06, 2008 at 06:41:39PM -0700, Paul Menage wrote:
> > On Tue, May 6, 2008 at 6:38 PM, Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > On Tue, 06 May 2008 18:08:17 -0700 Paul Menage <menage@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > > -static int update_relax_domain_level(struct cpuset *cs, char *buf)
> > > > +static int update_relax_domain_level(struct cpuset *cs, s64 val)
> > > > {
> > > > - int val = simple_strtol(buf, NULL, 10);
> > > > -
> > > > - if (val < 0)
> > > > + if ((int)val < 0)
> > > > val = -1;
> > > >
> > >
> > > Are you sure about the typecast here? If `val' has a value of say
> > > 0x0000_ffff_ffff_ffff then I assume the casted value will be negative, only
> > > it wasn't?
> >
> > It seems like the simplest approach - if it's outside the range of a
> > positive int, set it to -1.
>
> That's very hard to understand for someone who looks at the code - and
> being able to understand the code is much more important than the
> number of characters in the source code.
>
> If you'd write something like
>
> if ((val < 0) || (val > INT_MAX))
>
> instead it would be obvious for the reader what's happening here, and
> that this was intended.
What he said.
Our poor reader now knows what was intended. But he still doesn't know _why_
it was intended.
--
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/