(2011/03/16 16:59), Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Tue, 2011-03-15 at 23:18 +0000, tip-bot for Ingo Molnar wrote: > >> perf probe: Clean up probe_point_lazy_walker() return value > >> --- a/tools/perf/util/probe-finder.c >> +++ b/tools/perf/util/probe-finder.c >> @@ -1328,7 +1328,7 @@ static int probe_point_lazy_walker(const char *fname, int lineno, >> * Continue if no error, because the lazy pattern will match >> * to other lines >> */ >> - return ret < 0 ?: 0; >> + return ret < 0 ? ret : 0; >> } > > It is a slight change in semantics though, the return value will now be > negative instead of 1. If its used as a boolean that's fine, but still. > > I'd have changed it to: > > return ret < 0; > > Which is identical to the previous statement. Sorry this was my mistake, that statement actually aims to what Ingo has done. If probe_point_lazy_walker() returns non-zero value, die_walk_lines() returns immediately, because a positive return value means the handler finds line and wanna stop walking on the lines, and a negative return value means some errors occurred in the handler and must stop. However, probe_point_lazy_walker() has to continue to walk, because given lazy-pattern can match several lines. Thus, this must return 0 if ret is a positive value, and return an error code if ret is a negative value. Thank you, -- Masami HIRAMATSU 2nd Dept. Linux Technology Center Hitachi, Ltd., Systems Development Laboratory E-mail: masami.hiramatsu.pt@xxxxxxxxxxx -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-tip-commits" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html