[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20141202183509.GI4994@mwanda>
Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2014 21:35:09 +0300
From: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>
To: Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>
Cc: Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...6.fr>,
SF Markus Elfring <elfring@...rs.sourceforge.net>,
Lino Sanfilippo <LinoSanfilippo@....de>,
Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
backports@...r.kernel.org, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org,
"Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@...e.com>
Subject: Re: net-PA Semi: Deletion of unnecessary checks before the function
call "pci_dev_put"
On Tue, Dec 02, 2014 at 05:53:28PM +0100, Johannes Berg wrote:
> On Mon, 2014-12-01 at 21:34 +0100, Julia Lawall wrote:
>
> > > So this kind of evolution is no problem for the (automated) backports
> > > using the backports project - although it can be difficult to detect
> > > such a thing is needed.
> >
> > That is exactly the problem...
>
> I'm not convinced though that it should stop such progress in mainline.
Is it progress? These patches match the code look simpler by passing
hiding the NULL check inside a function call. Calling pci_dev_put(NULL)
doesn't make sense. Just because a sanity check exists doesn't mean we
should do insane things.
It's easy enough to store which functions have a sanity check in a
database, but to rememember all that as a human being trying to read the
code is impossible.
If we really wanted to make this code cleaner we would introduce more
error labels with better names.
regards,
dan carpenter
--
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