The "match" parameter of __bfs() is used for checking whether we hit a
match in the search, therefore it should return a boolean value rather
than an integer for better readability.

This patch then changes the return type of the function parameter and the
match functions to bool.

Suggested-by: Peter Zijlstra <pet...@infradead.org>
Signed-off-by: Boqun Feng <boqun.f...@gmail.com>
---
 kernel/locking/lockdep.c | 14 +++++++-------
 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/locking/lockdep.c b/kernel/locking/lockdep.c
index 53ce81e8a6a9..df1637db923a 100644
--- a/kernel/locking/lockdep.c
+++ b/kernel/locking/lockdep.c
@@ -1109,7 +1109,7 @@ static inline void bfs_init_root(struct lock_list *lock,
  */
 static enum bfs_result __bfs(struct lock_list *source_entry,
                             void *data,
-                            int (*match)(struct lock_list *entry, void *data),
+                            bool (*match)(struct lock_list *entry, void *data),
                             struct lock_list **target_entry,
                             int forward)
 {
@@ -1209,7 +1209,7 @@ static enum bfs_result __bfs(struct lock_list 
*source_entry,
 static inline enum bfs_result
 __bfs_forwards(struct lock_list *src_entry,
               void *data,
-              int (*match)(struct lock_list *entry, void *data),
+              bool (*match)(struct lock_list *entry, void *data),
               struct lock_list **target_entry)
 {
        return __bfs(src_entry, data, match, target_entry, 1);
@@ -1219,7 +1219,7 @@ __bfs_forwards(struct lock_list *src_entry,
 static inline enum bfs_result
 __bfs_backwards(struct lock_list *src_entry,
                void *data,
-               int (*match)(struct lock_list *entry, void *data),
+               bool (*match)(struct lock_list *entry, void *data),
                struct lock_list **target_entry)
 {
        return __bfs(src_entry, data, match, target_entry, 0);
@@ -1333,7 +1333,7 @@ print_circular_bug_header(struct lock_list *entry, 
unsigned int depth,
        return 0;
 }
 
-static inline int class_equal(struct lock_list *entry, void *data)
+static inline bool class_equal(struct lock_list *entry, void *data)
 {
        return entry->class == data;
 }
@@ -1392,10 +1392,10 @@ static noinline int print_bfs_bug(int ret)
        return 0;
 }
 
-static int noop_count(struct lock_list *entry, void *data)
+static bool noop_count(struct lock_list *entry, void *data)
 {
        (*(unsigned long *)data)++;
-       return 0;
+       return false;
 }
 
 static unsigned long __lockdep_count_forward_deps(struct lock_list *this)
@@ -1486,7 +1486,7 @@ check_redundant(struct lock_list *root, struct lock_class 
*target,
  * without creating any illegal irq-safe -> irq-unsafe lock dependency.
  */
 
-static inline int usage_match(struct lock_list *entry, void *bit)
+static inline bool usage_match(struct lock_list *entry, void *bit)
 {
        return entry->class->usage_mask & (1 << (enum lock_usage_bit)bit);
 }
-- 
2.16.2

Reply via email to