Date: Mon, 4 Apr 2016 05:11:35 +1000 (EST) From: Bruce Evans <brde@optusnet.com.au> To: "Pedro F. Giffuni" <pfg@freebsd.org> Cc: src-committers@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, svn-src-head@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r297525 - head/sys/compat/linux Message-ID: <20160404045828.M816@besplex.bde.org> In-Reply-To: <201604031440.u33EesB7057019@repo.freebsd.org> References: <201604031440.u33EesB7057019@repo.freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, 3 Apr 2016, Pedro F. Giffuni wrote: > Author: pfg > Log: > Fix indentation oops. > > Modified: > head/sys/compat/linux/linux_misc.c > > Modified: head/sys/compat/linux/linux_misc.c > ============================================================================== > --- head/sys/compat/linux/linux_misc.c Sun Apr 3 14:38:26 2016 (r297524) > +++ head/sys/compat/linux/linux_misc.c Sun Apr 3 14:40:54 2016 (r297525) > @@ -896,12 +896,12 @@ linux_utimensat(struct thread *td, struc > } > timesp = times; > > - if (times[0].tv_nsec == UTIME_OMIT && > - times[1].tv_nsec == UTIME_OMIT) > /* This breaks POSIX, but is what the Linux kernel does > * _on purpose_ (documented in the man page for utimensat(2)), > * so we must follow that behaviour. */ > - return (0); > + if (times[0].tv_nsec == UTIME_OMIT && > + times[1].tv_nsec == UTIME_OMIT) > + return (0); > } > > if (args->pathname != NULL) The comment is still not written in BSD style. The patch shows a bug in svn(?) diff. The comment was moved, but the patch shows movement of the if statement. The indentation was only changed in the return statement. The comment was also misindented. Moving it fixes this, but I prefer it where it was. Comments are often placed before an if statement and not properly worded for that placement. They say that something is done unconditionally but that is clearly wrong since the action is conditional on the if statement. Here "this" in the comment used to refer to the action of returning, but is ambiguous enough to still make sense after the move. It now refers to the action of doing the check and sometimes returning. The block of code is short enough that the ambiguity is easy to resolve. Bruce
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20160404045828.M816>