linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] mtd: orion_nand: fix error code path in probe

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: <543F5244.1010408@free-electrons.com>
Date:	Thu, 16 Oct 2014 07:06:12 +0200
From:	Michael Opdenacker <michael.opdenacker@...e-electrons.com>
To:	Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
CC:	dwmw2@...radead.org, computersforpeace@...il.com,
	jg1.han@...sung.com, linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mtd: orion_nand: fix error code path in probe

On 10/14/2014 11:35 PM, Andrew Lunn wrote:
>
>  
>  	if (pdev->dev.of_node) {
>  		board = devm_kzalloc(&pdev->dev, sizeof(struct orion_nand_data),
>  					GFP_KERNEL);
>  		if (!board) {
> -			ret = -ENOMEM;
> -			goto no_res;
> +			return -ENOMEM;
>  		}
> Doesn't this now break the coding style? No need to have the {} since
> it is a single statement.

Right, I've checked Documentation/CodingStyle, and this is just
recommended, not absolutely required. That could be the reason why
check_patch.pl didn't complain.

My v2 changes this.

Thanks!

Michael.

-- 
Michael Opdenacker, CEO, Free Electrons
Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering
http://free-electrons.com
+33 484 258 098

--
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/