linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 00/18] Input - Fix make coccicheck warnings

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: <20151002182507.GQ8437@dtor-ws>
Date:	Fri, 2 Oct 2015 11:25:07 -0700
From:	Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>
To:	Javier Martinez Canillas <javier@....samsung.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Ferruh Yigit <fery@...ress.com>,
	Axel Lin <axel.lin@...ics.com>,
	Pramod Gurav <pramod.gurav@...rtplayin.com>,
	Benjamin Tissoires <benjamin.tissoires@...hat.com>,
	Heiko Stuebner <heiko.stuebner@...com>,
	Fabio Estevam <fabio.estevam@...escale.com>,
	Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>,
	Rasmus Villemoes <linux@...musvillemoes.dk>,
	Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
	Dirk Behme <dirk.behme@...bosch.com>,
	Benson Leung <bleung@...omium.org>,
	Shailendra Verma <shailendra.capricorn@...il.com>,
	Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@...sung.com>,
	linux-input@...r.kernel.org, Duson Lin <dusonlin@....com.tw>,
	Jingoo Han <jg1.han@...sung.com>,
	Wolfram Sang <wsa@...-dreams.de>,
	Wei Yongjun <yongjun_wei@...ndmicro.com.cn>,
	Henrik Rydberg <rydberg@...math.org>,
	Daniel Mack <linux@...que.org>,
	Nick Dyer <nick.dyer@...ev.co.uk>,
	Matt Ranostay <mranostay@...il.com>,
	Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/18] Input - Fix make coccicheck warnings

Hi Javier,

On Fri, Oct 02, 2015 at 03:40:11PM +0200, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote:
> Hello Dmitry,
> 
> This series contains trivial patches with fixes to different warnings
> reported by make coccichek M=drivers/input.
> 
> The patches don't contain functional changes but makes the functions
> simpler and removes unnecessary lines of code.

I disagree with some "simplify function return logic" patches: when
there are several actions that may fail I prefer explicit:

	error = actionN();
	if (error)
		return error;

	return 0;

even on the last one as it keep with the code flow and makes it easier
to move stuff around.

Please consider patches that not explicitly replied to as applied a
dropped.

Thanks.

-- 
Dmitry
--
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/