On Tue, 31 Jan 2017 09:23:48 -0300
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <a...@kernel.org> wrote:
> Em Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 09:21:16AM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo escreveu:
> > Em Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 08:38:28PM +0900, Taeung Song escreveu:
> > > - while ((dent = readdir(dir))) {
> > > - if (dent->d_type != DT_DIR ||
> > > - strcmp(dent->d_name, ".") == 0 ||
> > > - strcmp(dent->d_name, "..") == 0 ||
> > > - strcmp(dent->d_name, "ftrace") == 0 ||
> > > + for_each_event(dir, dent, tps) {
> > > + if (!strcmp(dent->d_name, "ftrace") ||
> > > !system_in_tp_list(dent->d_name, tps))
> > > continue;
>
> > the existing style was == 0, you switched it to !, equivalent, but
> > gratuitous, keeping the existing style would make reviewing slightly
> > faster, as the pattern wouldn't have changed.
>
> Here it is:
>
> - while ((dent = readdir(dir))) {
> - if (dent->d_type != DT_DIR ||
> - strcmp(dent->d_name, ".") == 0 ||
> - strcmp(dent->d_name, "..") == 0 ||
> - strcmp(dent->d_name, "ftrace") == 0 ||
> + for_each_event(dir, dent, tps) {
> + if (strcmp(dent->d_name, "ftrace") == 0 ||
> !system_in_tp_list(dent->d_name, tps))
> continue;
Thanks, because I always screw up the !strcmp(). Thus I find the "== 0"
to me is easier to process "matches" and "!= 0" is "doesn't match".
-- Steve
