s390: Replace weird use of PTR_RET.
Saves repeating "(void __force *)__uptr" but it's less clear. Using the output of PTR_RET() to determine the error rather than just testing IS_ERR() is odd. For example, I *assume* __gptr_to_uptr() never returns NULL? Because the __ret would be 0 for the old code. The new version is clearer, IMHO: it would try to get_user() on that address. If you hate this variant, I can just s/PTR_RET/PTR_ERR_OR_ZERO/ instead. Cc: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com> Cc: Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com> Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au> Acked-by: Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com>
Showing
Please register or sign in to comment