linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: nforce2: Remove meaningless return

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Wed, 5 Dec 2018 01:03:50 +0800
From:   Frank Lee <tiny.windzz@...il.com>
To:     rafael@...nel.org
Cc:     rjw@...ysocki.net, Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>,
        linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: nforce2: Remove meaningless return

On Tue, Dec 4, 2018 at 4:46 PM Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Dec 4, 2018 at 2:15 AM Frank Lee <tiny.windzz@...il.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Dec 3, 2018 at 5:14 PM Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael@...nel.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 3:26 PM Yangtao Li <tiny.windzz@...il.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > In a function whose return type is void, returning on the last line is
> > > > not required.So remove it.Also move the module declaration to the end.
> > >
> > > The last piece is not reflected by the subject.
> > >
> > > Also, why do you move the MODULE_ stuff around at all?
> > When writing a driver, in most cases MODULE_  are put to the end.
> > Why not modify this? it is more in line with the habits of most people.
>
> If you write a new driver, then yes.
>
> But why do you want to modify existing drivers this way?  What value
> do you see in those changes, exactly?
OK.I'll update this.

MBR,
Yangtao