Re: [PATCH v2] iversion: make inode_cmp_iversion{+raw} return bool instead of s64

[PATCH] iversion: make inode_cmp_iversion{+raw} return bool instead of s64 · Jeff Layton <jlayton@kernel.org> · 2018-01-30
Re: [PATCH] iversion: make inode_cmp_iversion{+raw} return bool instead of s64 · Trond Myklebust <hidden> · 2018-01-30
Re: [PATCH] iversion: make inode_cmp_iversion{+raw} return bool instead of s64 · Jeff Layton <jlayton@kernel.org> · 2018-01-30
[PATCH v2] iversion: make inode_cmp_iversion{+raw} return bool instead of s64 · Jeff Layton <jlayton@kernel.org> · 2018-01-30
Re: [PATCH v2] iversion: make inode_cmp_iversion{+raw} return bool instead of s64 · Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> · 2018-01-30
Re: [PATCH v2] iversion: make inode_cmp_iversion{+raw} return bool instead of s64 · Jeff Layton <jlayton@kernel.org> · 2018-01-31
Re: [PATCH v2] iversion: make inode_cmp_iversion{+raw} return bool instead of s64 · Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> · 2018-01-31
Re: [PATCH v2] iversion: make inode_cmp_iversion{+raw} return bool instead of s64 · Jeff Layton <jlayton@kernel.org> · 2018-01-31

From: Jeff Layton <jlayton@kernel.org>
Date: 2018-01-31 12:29:27
Also in: linux-btrfs, linux-ext4, linux-fsdevel, linux-nfs, linux-xfs, lkml

On Tue, 2018-01-30 at 12:53 -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:

Ack. Should I expect this in a future pull request, or take it directly?

There's no hurry about this, since none of the existing users of that
function actually do anything but test the return value against zero,
and nobody saves it into anything but a "bool" (which has magical
casting properties and does not lose upper bits).

              Linus

Do you mind just taking it directly? I don't have anything else queued
up for this cycle.

Thanks,
-- 
Jeff Layton [off-list ref]

`h`	back out one level
`j`	next message in thread
`k`	previous message in thread
`l`	drill in
`Esc`	close help / fold thread tree
`?`	toggle this help