linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 4/4] remove goto statement

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 19 Feb 2008 10:22:35 +0800
From:	Li Zefan <lizf@...fujitsu.com>
To:	Glauber Costa <gcosta@...hat.com>
CC:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	andrew.grover@...el.com, paul.s.diefenbaugh@...el.com,
	linux@...do.de, anil.s.keshavamurthy@...el.com, lenb@...nel.org,
	linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] remove goto statement

Glauber Costa wrote:
> Li Zefan wrote:
>> Glauber Costa 写道:
>>> This patch removes goto statements in favour of plain returns
>>> in places that had nothing left behind that would justify
>>> such construction
>>> ---
>>>  drivers/acpi/processor_core.c |    4 ++--
>>>  1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/processor_core.c b/drivers/acpi/processor_core.c
>>> index 06a230a..70f62b6 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/acpi/processor_core.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/acpi/processor_core.c
>>> @@ -651,7 +651,7 @@ static int __cpuinit acpi_processor_star
>>>  
>>>  	result = acpi_processor_add_fs(device);
>>>  	if (result)
>>> -		goto end;
>>> +		return result;
>>>  
>>>  	status = acpi_install_notify_handler(pr->handle, ACPI_DEVICE_NOTIFY,
>>>  					     acpi_processor_notify, pr);
>>> @@ -675,7 +675,7 @@ #endif
>>>  			"%s is registered as cooling_device%d\n",
>>>  			device->dev.bus_id, cdev->id);
>>>  	else
>>> -		goto end;
>>> +		return result;
>>>  
>>>  	result = sysfs_create_link(&device->dev.kobj, &cdev->device.kobj,
>>>  					"thermal_cooling");
>> Seems you forgot to remove the 'end' label ?
> yes, in fact, thanks for pointing.
> 
> However, the patches are as split up as I could do, and it should not
> affect the others. I can re send this one, the whole series, or
> whatever, depending on what the maintainer wants.
> 
> So, what's gonna be?
> 

IMO a revised [PATCH 4/4] will do, since it won't affect the other 3 patches :)
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/