[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130731104448.GH2810@htj.dyndns.org>
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2013 06:44:48 -0400
From: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To: Li Zefan <lizefan@...wei.com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Cgroups <cgroups@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/7] cgroup: restructure the failure path in
cgroup_write_event_control()
On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 04:17:06PM +0800, Li Zefan wrote:
> It uses a single label and checks the validity of each pointer. This
> is err-prone, and actually we once had a bug because one of the check
> was insufficient.
>
> Use multi lables as we do in other places.
>
> Signed-off-by: Li Zefan <lizefan@...wei.com>
Hmm... I usually prefer mix of the two approaches as both extremes
tend to be pretty ugly when things get complex. I don't mind the
conversion but can you please drop the no longer unnecessary NULL
assignments on variable definitions?
Thanks.
--
tejun
--
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