From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.0 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 68AA7CA9EAE for ; Tue, 29 Oct 2019 20:15:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 23C6A2067D for ; Tue, 29 Oct 2019 20:15:24 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key) header.d=infradead.org header.i=@infradead.org header.b="S/ChoJyN" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726273AbfJ2UPX (ORCPT ); Tue, 29 Oct 2019 16:15:23 -0400 Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([198.137.202.133]:56642 "EHLO bombadil.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725840AbfJ2UPX (ORCPT ); Tue, 29 Oct 2019 16:15:23 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=infradead.org; s=bombadil.20170209; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Type:MIME-Version :References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Sender:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id: List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=LzVdL0wHnm5sm88oPlshU6HxnHkQI6xUUaMFyCCHz6w=; b=S/ChoJyNsr+FqVRPy4QQVpV4T bXF701TlM7rUvdvHvnqFCpvuoC+ZovETwZaBjB0uRLaTbraAOdKDuvsT3ObAE8642xb0iy6cFFl0O 0/5Y2sfvbW7Qd3gOInOIwOBErFrm9Id+U8Cxj10dsgtGyHx3hnrv/Sb1jQAxIz4SWyWIj7DK6pka7 /DkusRyXN/MSdgQ4u/pXWLZKskmUmx6EB5QM8FsOwKRTuVYJLoErDDGfPI6PFMzBKBHiZoFRUaFwX 1PRsqK+xuKdm4C298KOmlWbKDy96wMWKY40Fh/Hv7XK7T+WvnhIYVdfx/lfcEvwvnPAU59prGAP7N +N83CyUmw==; Received: from willy by bombadil.infradead.org with local (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1iPXth-0007MY-Ed; Tue, 29 Oct 2019 20:15:21 +0000 Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2019 13:15:21 -0700 From: Matthew Wilcox To: "Schumaker, Anna" Cc: "linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org" , "viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk" , "mbenjami@redhat.com" , "boaz@plexistor.com" , "dan.j.williams@intel.com" , "mszeredi@redhat.com" , "amir73il@gmail.com" , "Manole, Sagi" Subject: Re: [PATCH 11/16] zuf: Write/Read implementation Message-ID: <20191029201521.GC17669@bombadil.infradead.org> References: <20190926020725.19601-1-boazh@netapp.com> <20190926020725.19601-12-boazh@netapp.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.12.1 (2019-06-15) Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Oct 29, 2019 at 08:08:16PM +0000, Schumaker, Anna wrote: > > + return size ?: ret; > > It looks like you're returning "ret" if the ternary evaluates to false, but it's not clear to > me what is returned if it evaluates to true. It's possible it's okay, but I just don't know > enough about how ternaries work in this case. It's an unloved, unwnted GNU extension. See https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Conditionals.html It's really no better than writing: return size ? size : ret; or even better: if (size) return size; return ret;