[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <9d9b724b-229a-acab-54f8-6c45dda96f44@hartkopp.net>
Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2017 21:54:00 +0200
From: Oliver Hartkopp <socketcan@...tkopp.net>
To: SF Markus Elfring <elfring@...rs.sourceforge.net>,
linux-can@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Cc: Marc Kleine-Budde <mkl@...gutronix.de>,
Wolfgang Grandegger <wg@...ndegger.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: can: Use common error handling code in vxcan_newlink()
On 10/28/2017 09:18 PM, SF Markus Elfring wrote:
>> If you want to change the semantic of the result check
>
> I am curious if another source code reduction (by the deletion of “ < 0”)
> will become acceptable at similar places.
>
Source code reduction is not the main target.
If you can simplify code without changing the wanted semantic you made
an improvement.
>
>> - this has to done consistently at all rtnl_configure_link() caller sites.
>
> Are there any more functions to consider?
Of course there are more callers of rtnl_configure_link() ...
>> And not only in vxcan.c
>
> Are you interested in related adjustments for a bigger code base?
No. Definitely not.
If you aim for the the deletion of “ < 0” for all rtnl_configure_link()
users you would need to do this consistently.
If you think you would like to do that. Feel free to do it.
Regards,
Oliver
Powered by blists - more mailing lists