linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/13 v2] [SCSI] qla2xxx: make return of 0 explicit

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

Date:	Tue, 20 May 2014 07:36:48 +0800 (SGT)
From:	Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...6.fr>
To:	Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>
cc:	Saurav Kashyap <saurav.kashyap@...gic.com>,
	Dept-Eng QLA2xxx Upstream <qla2xxx-upstream@...gic.com>,
	"kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org" <kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org>,
	"James E.J. Bottomley" <JBottomley@...allels.com>,
	linux-scsi <linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/13 v2] [SCSI] qla2xxx: make return of 0 explicit



On Mon, 19 May 2014, Dan Carpenter wrote:

> On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 04:07:52PM +0000, Saurav Kashyap wrote:
> > Hi Julia,
> >
> > Status is already set to 0 at the beginning of the function, I think
> > we should just "return status" here to be consistent with the rest of
> > the function.
>
> "return 0;" is more clear than "return status;".
>
> Consistency is great so long as it makes the code easier to read.  Don't
> lose track of the real goal.

If status were an informative word, there might be a reason for it.  But
integer typed functions almost always return their status, so there is no
real information.

julia
--
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/