On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 10:04:11PM -0500, Brian Foster wrote: > On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 10:53:15AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 10:35:15AM -0500, Brian Foster wrote: > > > Why not use != here? Looks fine, anyways: > > > > Because ^ has an implicit cast of the variables to boolean (i.e flag > > set or not), whereas != will only work if XFS_XFLAG_PROJINHERIT = > > XFS_DIFLAG_PROJINHERIT. Given that the moment we add more DIFLAGs to > > the xfs inode, the current "XFLAG value must match DIFLAG value" > > rule is going to be broken, I think that logical evaluation is a > > much safer practice for these types of comparisons. > > > > Hrm, I'm not following how a boolean cast occurs here. Isn't ^ a bitwise > operation? Ah, yes, you are right. I'mi not sure what type of crack I was smoking this morning (or when I wrote it). I'll fix it up.... Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
