[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Sun, 10 Oct 2021 11:56:01 +0300
From: Pavel Skripkin <paskripkin@...il.com>
To: Saurav Girepunje <saurav.girepunje@...il.com>,
gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, fabioaiuto83@...il.com,
ross.schm.dev@...il.com, marcocesati@...il.com,
insafonov@...il.com, linux-staging@...ts.linux.dev,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: saurav.girepunje@...mail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] staging: rtl8723bs: os_dep: simplify the return
statement.
On 10/10/21 08:06, Saurav Girepunje wrote:
> Remove the unneeded and redundant check of variable on goto out.
> Simplify the return using multiple goto label to avoid
> unneeded check.
>
> Signed-off-by: Saurav Girepunje <saurav.girepunje@...il.com>
[code snip]
> ret = cfg80211_register_netdevice(mon_ndev);
> if (ret) {
> - goto out;
> + goto err_register;
> }
>
> *ndev = pwdev_priv->pmon_ndev = mon_ndev;
> memcpy(pwdev_priv->ifname_mon, name, IFNAMSIZ+1);
> + goto out;
>
This looks confusing for readers. This is success path and ret is
guaranteed to be 0 at this point, so isn't `return 0;` enough here?
Thanks
> +out:
> return ret;
> }
>
With regards,
Pavel Skripkin
Powered by blists - more mailing lists