On Thu, 28 Aug 2025 at 16:08, Al Viro <viro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> if (beneath) {
> - err = can_move_mount_beneath(old, new_path, mp.mp);
> + err = can_move_mount_beneath(old, real_mount(new_path->mnt), mp.mp);
> if (err)
> return err;
> }
Going through the patches, this is one that I think made things
uglier... Most of them make me go "nice simplification".
(I'll have a separate comment on 61/63)
I certainly agree with the intent of the patch, but that
can_move_mount_beneath() call line is now rather hard to read. It
looked simpler before.
Maybe you could just split it into two lines, and write it as
if (beneath) {
struct mount *new_mnt = real_mount(new_path->mnt);
err = can_move_mount_beneath(old, new_mnt, mp.mp);
if (err)
return err;
}
which makes slightly less happen in that one line (and it fits in 80
columns too - not a requirement, but still "good taste")
Long lines are better than randomly splitting lines unreadably into
multiple lines, but short lines that are logically split are still
preferred, I would say..
Linus
