[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <4ED8FDE102000078000651E5@nat28.tlf.novell.com>
Date: Fri, 02 Dec 2011 15:33:37 +0000
From: "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@...e.com>
To: "Borislav Petkov" <bp@...64.org>,
"Srivatsa S. Bhat" <srivatsa.bhat@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: <mingo@...e.hu>, <tglx@...utronix.de>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <hpa@...or.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: fix error paths in microcode_init()
>>> On 02.12.11 at 16:24, Borislav Petkov <bp@...64.org> wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 02, 2011 at 08:45:09PM +0530, Srivatsa S. Bhat wrote:
>> Your patch fixes the issue more properly than mine, but adding your part
>> on top of my patch makes the code look better. For example,
>> platform_device_unregister() wouldn't need to be called twice; and we
>> can use the quite popular way of handling error path via goto statements,
>> which makes the code flow much more comprehensible and intuitive.
>
> Yes,
>
> goto labels is the proper way for spelling error handling in the kernel
> so I could very well take your patch Jan, instead, if you change it to
> use goto labels for the error path as Srivatsa's patch does it. That is,
> in case Ingo hasn't pulled yet.
Sorry, no, I won't introduce new labels in functions not already using
some (I'm already feeling guilty enough each time I end up doing so
when a function already is coded that way, to limit the impact of a
particular change). This is just bad programming style in my opinion, no
matter what other developers may think on this subject.
Jan
--
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