[PATCH 1/3] staging: lustre/lustre/lov: Remove unneeded 'if' statement in lov_request.c/lov_check_set()

[Riccardo Lucchese]

It is silly to go through an if statement to set a single boolean
value in function of a single boolean expression. In the function
lov_check_set, assign the return value directly.

Signed-off-by: Riccardo Lucchese <riccardo.lucchese@xxxxxxxxx>
---
 drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/lov/lov_request.c | 11 +++++------
 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/lov/lov_request.c b/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/lov/lov_request.c
index ce830e4..90fc66a 100644
--- a/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/lov/lov_request.c
+++ b/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/lov/lov_request.c
@@ -140,14 +140,13 @@ void lov_set_add_req(struct lov_request *req, struct lov_request_set *set)
 
 static int lov_check_set(struct lov_obd *lov, int idx)
 {
-	int rc = 0;
+	int rc;
 	mutex_lock(&lov->lov_lock);
 
-	if (lov->lov_tgts[idx] == NULL ||
-	    lov->lov_tgts[idx]->ltd_active ||
-	    (lov->lov_tgts[idx]->ltd_exp != NULL &&
-	     class_exp2cliimp(lov->lov_tgts[idx]->ltd_exp)->imp_connect_tried))
-		rc = 1;
+	rc = lov->lov_tgts[idx] == NULL ||
+		lov->lov_tgts[idx]->ltd_active ||
+		(lov->lov_tgts[idx]->ltd_exp != NULL &&
+		 class_exp2cliimp(lov->lov_tgts[idx]->ltd_exp)->imp_connect_tried);
 
 	mutex_unlock(&lov->lov_lock);
 	return rc;
-- 
1.9.1

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/