On Wed, 13 May 2015 15:16:13 +0200
David Sterba <dste...@suse.cz> wrote:
> On Wed, May 13, 2015 at 03:37:12PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> > GW-BASIC style label names are annoying so we can warn about that in
> > checkpatch. The warnings look like:
> >
> > WARNING: 'fail2' isn't informative - prefer descriptive label names
> > #267: FILE: ./sound/ppc/beep.c:267:
> > + fail2: snd_ctl_remove(chip->card, beep_ctl);
> >
> > This generates slightly under 2000 new warnings. None of them are
> > false positives.
>
> Please whitelist fs/btrfs/* from this type of checkpatch warning.
If you could whitelist the rest of the kernel too that would also be
useful.
There's nothing wrong with driver code that ends
fail_3:
xxx
fail_2:
yyy
fail_1:
blah
return;
if anything it makes it very clear which level of unravelling on error is
occurring and at a glance enables you to see that the error handling is
ordered properly.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
