[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20080509121206.GE13470@solarflare.com>
Date: Fri, 9 May 2008 13:12:07 +0100
From: Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@...arflare.com>
To: Ilpo Järvinen <ilpo.jarvinen@...sinki.fi>
Cc: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@...ox.com>, Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-net-drivers@...arflare.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/9] Removed bogus 'fall-thru' comments
Ilpo Järvinen wrote:
> On Wed, 7 May 2008, Ben Hutchings wrote:
>
> > Fall-through is expected outside a switch statement.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@...arflare.com>
> > ---
> > drivers/net/sfc/falcon.c | 2 --
> > drivers/net/sfc/rx.c | 1 -
> > 2 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/net/sfc/falcon.c b/drivers/net/sfc/falcon.c
> > index 46db549..9cac344 100644
> > --- a/drivers/net/sfc/falcon.c
> > +++ b/drivers/net/sfc/falcon.c
> > @@ -2468,14 +2468,12 @@ int falcon_probe_nic(struct efx_nic *efx)
> > fail5:
> > falcon_free_buffer(efx, &efx->irq_status);
> > fail4:
> > - /* fall-thru */
> > fail3:
> > if (nic_data->pci_dev2) {
> > pci_dev_put(nic_data->pci_dev2);
> > nic_data->pci_dev2 = NULL;
> > }
> > fail2:
> > - /* fall-thru */
> > fail1:
> > kfree(efx->nic_data);
> > return rc;
>
> Is there really any point in keeping those extra goto targets? I'd suggest
> that you simply eliminate the extra ones completely.
I think we'll do that at some point, along with giving them meaningful
names rather than numbers. But not right now.
Ben.
--
Ben Hutchings, Senior Software Engineer, Solarflare Communications
Not speaking for my employer; that's the marketing department's job.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists