On Mon, Jun 26, 2023 at 11:15:19AM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > On Fri, Jun 23, 2023 at 04:43:55PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > On Thu, Jun 22, 2023 at 8:19 PM Andy Shevchenko > > <andriy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On Thu, Jun 22, 2023 at 05:53:13PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > > > On Wed, Jun 21, 2023 at 5:16 PM Andy Shevchenko > > > > <andriy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: ... > > BTW, this doesn't need to increment the count even. It could just > > terminate the walk on the first valid resource found and tell the > > caller to return true in that case. > > Indeed, thank you for the hint! Actually it's doesn't matter if we count them or not, we still must use the context of the call to set up a flag or whatever. With the current code in mind I prefer to count resources and compare that to be non-zero. This will help to read and understand code better. That said, I will go with (*counter)++; -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko
