On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 10:09:10AM +0000, Dexuan Cui wrote:
> > I'd suggest you do something like
> >
> > if (ret == -EAGIAIN)
> > return 0;
> > else if (ret)
> > return ret;
> >
> > to make it future-proof (e.g. when a new error is returned by
> > hv_ringbuffer_peek). And a comment would also be useful as it is unclear
> > why we silence errors here.
> Hi Vitaly,
> Thanks!
> I think I made a mistake here:
> the "if (ret != 0) return 0;" should be changed
> to "if (ret != 0) return ret;"
The double negative really doesn't not make the code more complicated.
I like using a quadruple negative instead.
if (ret != 0 != 0)
return ret;
regards,
dan carpenter
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
