[<prev] [next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <44E9829B.7010503@de.ibm.com>
Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2006 11:53:31 +0200
From: Thomas Klein <osstklei@...ibm.com>
To: Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...l.org>
CC: Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>,
Jan-Bernd Themann <ossthema@...ibm.com>,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, Christoph Raisch <raisch@...ibm.com>,
Jan-Bernd Themann <themann@...ibm.com>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-ppc <linuxppc-dev@...abs.org>,
Marcus Eder <meder@...ibm.com>,
Thomas Klein <tklein@...ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [2.6.19 PATCH 4/7] ehea: ethtool interface
Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> On Fri, 18 Aug 2006 17:41:26 +0200
> Thomas Klein <osstklei@...ibm.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi Alexey,
>>
>> first of all thanks a lot for the extensive review.
>>
>>
>> Alexey Dobriyan wrote:
>>>> + u64 hret = H_HARDWARE;
>>> Useless assignment here and everywhere.
>>>
>> Initializing returncodes to errorstate is a cheap way to prevent
>> accidentally returning (uninitalized) success returncodes which
>> can lead to catastrophic misbehaviour.
>
> That is old thinking. Current compilers do live/dead analysis
> and tell you about this at compile time which is better than relying
> on default behavior at runtime.
Understood. I reworked the returncode handling and removed the
unnecessary initializations.
Thanks for pointing this out.
Thomas
-
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists