On Fri, 29 Dec 2000, Russell King wrote:
> Marcelo Tosatti writes:
> > +int mark_buffer_dirty(struct buffer_head *bh)
> > {
> > + if (!atomic_set_buffer_dirty(bh)) {
> > + return 1;
> > + }
> > + return 0;
> > }
>
> Any particular reason why you don't to:
>
> return !atomic_set_buffer_dirty(bh);
>
> which generates better code on some systems?
No.
If Linus applies the patch I'll change the code to the way you suggested.
Thanks.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
