[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <d052b441-cc4d-4b2b-1442-b1a30bed2fdb@redhat.com>
Date: Fri, 10 Jul 2020 09:46:54 +0200
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
To: Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@....de>,
Xianting Tian <xianting_tian@....com>,
linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org,
virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org
Cc: kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
"James E. J. Bottomley" <jejb@...ux.ibm.com>,
Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>,
"Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>,
"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>,
Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] scsi: virtio_scsi: Remove unnecessary condition checks
On 10/07/20 09:40, Markus Elfring wrote:
>>> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/drivers/scsi/virtio_scsi.c?id=42f82040ee66db13525dc6f14b8559890b2f4c1c#n980
>>>
>>> if (!virtscsi_cmd_cache) {
>>> pr_err("kmem_cache_create() for virtscsi_cmd_cache failed\n");
>>> - goto error;
>>> + return -ENOMEM;
>>> }
>>
>> Could be doable, but I don't see a particular benefit.
>
> Can a bit more “compliance” (with the Linux coding style) matter here?
No.
>> Having a single error loop is an advantage by itself.
>
> I do not see that a loop is involved in the implementation of the function “init”.
s/loop/label/ sorry.
Paolo
Powered by blists - more mailing lists