Re: [PATCH v2] Use blist_flags_t consistently

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Mon, Dec 11, 2017 at 04:08:03PM -0800, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> +		if (!((__force unsigned int)sdev->sdev_bflags & BIT(i)))

I'd case the right side argument to  __force blist_flags_t here for
purely esthetic reasons.

Except for that this looks fine to me:

Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx>



[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [SCSI Target Devel]     [Linux SCSI Target Infrastructure]     [Kernel Newbies]     [IDE]     [Security]     [Git]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux ATA RAID]     [Linux IIO]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]

  Powered by Linux