Re: [PATCH] staging: lustre: mgc: no need to compare bool value

2015-07-13 Thread Greg Kroah-Hartman
On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 04:26:11PM +0200, Luis de Bethencourt wrote: > Inverting the value of eof is a more direct way of passing to the debugging > function if eof is false or not. Really? I like the explicit-ness of the code as it is today, it's more obvious what is going on, which is the most

Re: [PATCH] staging: lustre: mgc: no need to compare bool value

2015-07-13 Thread Greg Kroah-Hartman
On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 04:26:11PM +0200, Luis de Bethencourt wrote: Inverting the value of eof is a more direct way of passing to the debugging function if eof is false or not. Really? I like the explicit-ness of the code as it is today, it's more obvious what is going on, which is the most

[PATCH] staging: lustre: mgc: no need to compare bool value

2015-06-23 Thread Luis de Bethencourt
Inverting the value of eof is a more direct way of passing to the debugging function if eof is false or not. Signed-off-by: Luis de Bethencourt --- drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/mgc/mgc_request.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git

[PATCH] staging: lustre: mgc: no need to compare bool value

2015-06-23 Thread Luis de Bethencourt
Inverting the value of eof is a more direct way of passing to the debugging function if eof is false or not. Signed-off-by: Luis de Bethencourt l...@debethencourt.com --- drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/mgc/mgc_request.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git