Hi Florian, On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 11:17 PM, Florian Westphal <fw@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > fgao@xxxxxxxxxx <fgao@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/net/netfilter/xt_nfacct.c b/net/netfilter/xt_nfacct.c >> index cf32759..7abb5b5 100644 >> --- a/net/netfilter/xt_nfacct.c >> +++ b/net/netfilter/xt_nfacct.c >> @@ -28,7 +28,7 @@ static bool nfacct_mt(const struct sk_buff *skb, struct xt_action_param *par) >> >> overquota = nfnl_acct_overquota(par->net, skb, info->nfacct); >> >> - return overquota == NFACCT_UNDERQUOTA ? false : true; >> + return !(overquota == NFACCT_UNDERQUOTA); > > I don't find one better than the other. If you need to change > it for some reason consider > > "return overquota != NFACCT_UNDERQUOTA" > > instead of this strange negation. Thanks, it is more simple use "!=". > > But really, I think its fine as-is. It could decrease one condition check and jump. Regards Feng -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netfilter-devel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
