linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] staging: r8188eu: core: remove goto statement

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]

Date:   Mon, 25 Oct 2021 12:26:48 -0500
From:   Larry Finger <Larry.Finger@...inger.net>
To:     Saurav Girepunje <saurav.girepunje@...il.com>,
        phil@...lpotter.co.uk, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org,
        straube.linux@...il.com, fmdefrancesco@...il.com,
        linux-staging@...ts.linux.dev, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     saurav.girepunje@...mail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] staging: r8188eu: core: remove goto statement

On 10/25/21 12:00, Saurav Girepunje wrote:
> 
> 
> On 25/10/21 8:45 pm, Larry Finger wrote:
>> On 10/25/21 07:15, Saurav Girepunje wrote:
>>> Remove the goto statement from rtw_do_join(). In this function goto
>>> can be replace by return statement. As on goto label exit, function only
>>> return it is not performing any cleanup. Avoiding goto will improve
>>> the function readability.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Saurav Girepunje <saurav.girepunje@...il.com>
>>> ---
>>
> Hi Larry,
>   
>> You need to read section 14 of Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst to learn how to submit a revised patch.
> Resubmitting such a revision using the same subject line is likely to confuse reviewers and maintainers alike, if not patchworks.
>>
> This is original patch (v1). I haven't get any review comment for this patch.

Why did I get it twice? At least I got two messages with that subject line.

Larry