Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
From:   John Ogness <john.ogness@linutronix.de>
To:     Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        Andrea Parri <andrea.parri@amarulasolutions.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>,
        Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com>,
        kexec@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v5 2/3] printk-rb: new printk ringbuffer implementation (reader)
References: <20191128015235.12940-1-john.ogness@linutronix.de>
        <20191128015235.12940-3-john.ogness@linutronix.de>
        <20191203120622.zux33do54rmjafns@pathway.suse.cz>
        <87pnh5bjz4.fsf@linutronix.de>
        <20191204125450.ob5b7xi3gevor4qz@pathway.suse.cz>
Date:   Wed, 04 Dec 2019 14:28:48 +0100
In-Reply-To: <20191204125450.ob5b7xi3gevor4qz@pathway.suse.cz> (Petr Mladek's
        message of "Wed, 4 Dec 2019 13:54:50 +0100")
Message-ID: <87a788fcdr.fsf@linutronix.de>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.4 (gnu/linux)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On 2019-12-04, Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com> wrote:
>> +	} else if ((DATA_WRAPS(data_ring, blk_lpos->begin) + 1 ==
>> +		    DATA_WRAPS(data_ring, blk_lpos->next)) ||
>> +		   ((DATA_WRAPS(data_ring, blk_lpos->begin) ==
>> +		     DATA_WRAPS(data_ring, -1UL)) &&
>> +		    (DATA_WRAPS(data_ring, blk_lpos->next) == 0))) {
>
> I wonder if the following might be easier to understand even for
> people like me ;-)
>
> 	} else if (DATA_WRAPS(data_ring, blk_lpos->begin + DATA_SIZE(data_ring)) ==
> 		    DATA_WRAPS(data_ring, blk_lpos->next)) {

Yes, this is clear and covers both cases. Thanks.

John