[<prev] [next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1408195050-5626-1-git-send-email-slaoub@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 16 Aug 2014 21:17:30 +0800
From: Chen Yucong <slaoub@...il.com>
To: tony.luck@...el.com
Cc: bp@...en8.de, linux-edac@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Chen Yucong <slaoub@...il.com>
Subject: [PATCH] x86, MCE: eliminate the strange combination of return and break
What do you feel when you see the code snippet like that shown below?
switch (c) {
case X:
... ...
return 1;
break;
case Y:
... ...
return 1;
break;
}
All in all, in many ways I'm not feeling well. I think a small change
is needed here. This patch aims to eliminate the strange combination of
*return* and *break* in the above switch-statement.
Signed-off-by: Chen Yucong <slaoub@...il.com>
---
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mcheck/mce.c | 6 +++---
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mcheck/mce.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mcheck/mce.c
index bd9ccda..5915be5 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mcheck/mce.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mcheck/mce.c
@@ -1618,15 +1618,15 @@ static int __mcheck_cpu_ancient_init(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c)
switch (c->x86_vendor) {
case X86_VENDOR_INTEL:
intel_p5_mcheck_init(c);
- return 1;
break;
case X86_VENDOR_CENTAUR:
winchip_mcheck_init(c);
- return 1;
break;
+ default:
+ return 0;
}
- return 0;
+ return 1;
}
static void __mcheck_cpu_init_vendor(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c)
--
1.7.10.4
--
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