linux-kernel - Re: [trivial PATCH] arch/x86: Remove unnecessary returns from void function()'s

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]

Message-ID: <4BEA226D.3080103@zytor.com>
Date:	Tue, 11 May 2010 20:37:17 -0700
From:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To:	Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
CC:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, x86@...nel.org,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Jiri Kosina <trivial@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [trivial PATCH] arch/x86: Remove unnecessary returns from void
 function()'s

On 05/11/2010 06:53 PM, Joe Perches wrote:
> 
> Just a stat from arch/x86:
> 
> There may be a little over 2000 void functions in arch/x86/,
> 40 use returns before the trailing brace.
> 
> Call it churn or consistency, <shrug>.
> 

No, please get something straight:

Consistency is not an end in itself.  Readability is, however.

Avoiding churn, however, is *also* an end in itself.  Sometimes churn is
motivated by an increase in readability.  Churn is *not* motivated just
for "consistency" unless it improves readability.

	-hpa

-- 
H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center
I work for Intel.  I don't speak on their behalf.

--
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/