Re: [PATCH] Remove unneeded code in sys_getpriority

2008-02-03 Thread Frank Seidel
On Sunday 03 February 2008 18:58, Rabin Vincent wrote: > Do you mean the PRIO_* cases in the switch? They're still independent > of position after the patch because they don't fall through. Yes, sure, this is fully correct now. Just if somehting whatsoever is put ahead touching retval one need

Re: [PATCH] Remove unneeded code in sys_getpriority

2008-02-03 Thread Rabin Vincent
On Sun, Feb 03, 2008 at 10:54:45AM +0100, Frank Seidel wrote: > On Sunday 03 February 2008 04:04, Rabin Vincent wrote: > > This check is not required because the condition is always true. > > ... > > - if (niceval > retval) > > - retval =

Re: [PATCH] Remove unneeded code in sys_getpriority

2008-02-03 Thread Frank Seidel
On Sunday 03 February 2008 04:04, Rabin Vincent wrote: > This check is not required because the condition is always true. > ... > - if (niceval > retval) > - retval = niceval; > + retval = 20 -

Re: [PATCH] Remove unneeded code in sys_getpriority

2008-02-03 Thread Frank Seidel
On Sunday 03 February 2008 04:04, Rabin Vincent wrote: This check is not required because the condition is always true. ... - if (niceval retval) - retval = niceval; + retval = 20 - task_nice(p);

Re: [PATCH] Remove unneeded code in sys_getpriority

2008-02-03 Thread Rabin Vincent
On Sun, Feb 03, 2008 at 10:54:45AM +0100, Frank Seidel wrote: On Sunday 03 February 2008 04:04, Rabin Vincent wrote: This check is not required because the condition is always true. ... - if (niceval retval) - retval = niceval;

Re: [PATCH] Remove unneeded code in sys_getpriority

2008-02-03 Thread Frank Seidel
On Sunday 03 February 2008 18:58, Rabin Vincent wrote: Do you mean the PRIO_* cases in the switch? They're still independent of position after the patch because they don't fall through. Yes, sure, this is fully correct now. Just if somehting whatsoever is put ahead touching retval one need to

[PATCH] Remove unneeded code in sys_getpriority

2008-02-02 Thread Rabin Vincent
This check is not required because the condition is always true. Signed-off-by: Rabin Vincent <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> --- kernel/sys.c |7 ++- 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) diff --git a/kernel/sys.c b/kernel/sys.c index d1fe71e..a001974 100644 --- a/kernel/sys.c +++

[PATCH] Remove unneeded code in sys_getpriority

2008-02-02 Thread Rabin Vincent
This check is not required because the condition is always true. Signed-off-by: Rabin Vincent [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- kernel/sys.c |7 ++- 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) diff --git a/kernel/sys.c b/kernel/sys.c index d1fe71e..a001974 100644 --- a/kernel/sys.c +++