Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
IronPort-SDR: z/02lHZCV+6yCNwRxP9N4FAj11lL1xbL6lMx+ipp6YNTyI1u/L+4Lz3mIPigMgYr6RikrQNN1P
 Xnf+Sg78MNpUNupXWQzEGf2PX8s5rmlHMpeODBO7RqHRjoe1SN7Od9gC1t8sLHr5eiEBwzMPCr
 i+2nAl1IeaLajaErPZ4svqGqy2hmU8v5SzexAi3J8R/bwx/befo9nyKhizoa1oC/D5EjpNd2pY
 r/pz8UigREahwNIXtQ8bxuf+PsLzrGT53giQSNqBmDxIzaFpWSvn29ikcnbv1ZdXE/fdHEdEnO
 K+w=
From:   Chaitanya Kulkarni <Chaitanya.Kulkarni@wdc.com>
To:     Logan Gunthorpe <logang@deltatee.com>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org" <linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org>,
        "linux-block@vger.kernel.org" <linux-block@vger.kernel.org>,
        Omar Sandoval <osandov@osandov.com>
CC:     Sagi Grimberg <sagi@grimberg.me>,
        Stephen Bates <sbates@raithlin.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH blktests v2 02/11] common/xfs: Create common helper to
 check for XFS support
Thread-Topic: [PATCH blktests v2 02/11] common/xfs: Create common helper to
 check for XFS support
Thread-Index: AQHWl1sou8OL2CxeA0mV1a+SBBjD2A==
Date:   Wed, 7 Oct 2020 00:58:23 +0000
Message-ID: <BYAPR04MB4965E6FFC184E347DDB78A29860A0@BYAPR04MB4965.namprd04.prod.outlook.com>
References: <20200930185422.11494-1-logang@deltatee.com>
 <20200930185422.11494-3-logang@deltatee.com>
 <BYAPR04MB4965388F1D0E70EDCEDD57E2860D0@BYAPR04MB4965.namprd04.prod.outlook.com>
 <b809f785-fc8b-4fa5-5de2-26dc9a4aed94@deltatee.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
wdcipoutbound: EOP-TRUE
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 4d22471e-b258-4896-925e-08d86a5c172d
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 07 Oct 2020 00:58:23.0513
 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: b61c8803-16f3-4c35-9b17-6f65f441df86
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: o7fqko/tKq/yYcrfQPwepgWqKEMV9y6wIoIe8BlavdY2b2DRpqE8LdpWWWqkJ2zwcFcIfH7PUt4UXxVCMe8/dEswdb6u0x+I5mzgz/uBsSU=
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BYAPR04MB3958
Precedence: bulk
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On 10/6/20 16:51, Logan Gunthorpe wrote:=0A=
> _have_xfs() does return true/false and can be used with && or in a=0A=
> conditional.=0A=
>=0A=
> Per [1], my opinion is that using && in the requires() function where=0A=
> the return value is ignored is confusing so I prefer not to do it in new=
=0A=
> code.=0A=
>=0A=
> If we want to reconsider this we, should add a check to ensure the=0A=
> return value of requires() matches the expectation of the global=0A=
> variable it uses.=0A=
>=0A=
> Logan=0A=
>=0A=
> [1]=0A=
> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-block/92478e6f-622a-a1ae-6189-4009f9a307bc@=
deltatee.com/=0A=
=0A=
Make sense to me, lets not change this, thanks for pointing that out.=0A=
=0A=