linux-kernel - Re: staging: lustre: Delete unnecessary goto statements in six functions

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, 15 Dec 2015 19:02:44 +0100
From:	SF Markus Elfring <elfring@...rs.sourceforge.net>
To:	Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>,
	Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>
Cc:	Andreas Dilger <andreas.dilger@...el.com>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	Oleg Drokin <oleg.drokin@...el.com>,
	lustre-devel@...ts.lustre.org, devel@...verdev.osuosl.org,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org,
	Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...6.fr>
Subject: Re: staging: lustre: Delete unnecessary goto statements in six
 functions

> This is the original code:
Really …?
> 	result = baz();
> 	if (result)
> 		goto label;
>
> label:
> 	go on...

I do not see such a source code structure
at the six places I propose to clean-up.


> I don't find the test->goto label; label: use offensive,
> but if he does, I think keeping a blank line in place of
> the test->goto might be better.

I find this an interesting view on source code layout.
Are there any more opinions around such implementation details?

Regards,
Markus
--
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/