Re: [PATCH] pid: Don't hash pid 0.

>> How about nr==0, it would make it more obvious.
>
> I am inclined to agree. `!nr' seems to imply some sort of an error condition;

! seems to imply a boolean usually. (If this was Java, this would even 
be enforced.)
However, !x (and x) is scattered all around the kernel where 
x==0,x!=0 (or x==NULL,x!=NULL) would be more readable.

> perhaps a comment could be placed in order to make why the case of (nr == 0) is
> being ignored.
>
> - Yuki.
>

Jan Engelhardt
-- 
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [PATCH] pid: Don't hash pid 0.
  - From: Nigel Cunningham <[email protected]>

References:
- [PATCH] pid: Don't hash pid 0.
  - From: [email protected] (Eric W. Biederman)
- Re: [PATCH] pid: Don't hash pid 0.
  - From: Jan Engelhardt <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH] pid: Don't hash pid 0.
  - From: Yuki Cuss <[email protected]>

Prev by Date: [PATCH 2/3] pidhash: don't use zero pids
Next by Date: [PATCH 3/3] pidhash: temporal debug checks
Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH] pid: Don't hash pid 0.
Next by thread: Re: [PATCH] pid: Don't hash pid 0.
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

[Index of Archives] [Kernel Newbies] [Netfilter] [Bugtraq] [Photo] [Stuff] [Gimp] [Yosemite News] [MIPS Linux] [ARM Linux] [Linux Security] [Linux RAID] [Video 4 Linux] [Linux for the blind] [Linux Resources]