On Thu, Oct 08, 2015 at 04:34:27PM +0200, David Herrmann wrote:
> Hi
>
> On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 1:31 PM, Sergei Zviagintsev <ser...@s15v.net> wrote:
> > Do not initialize `name' and `ret' as values are assigned to them at
> > the first use by kdbus_pin_dst(). Simplify handling of
> > kdbus_conn_entry_insert() return value and drop useless goto.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Sergei Zviagintsev <ser...@s15v.net>
> > ---
> > ipc/kdbus/connection.c | 10 ++++------
> > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/ipc/kdbus/connection.c b/ipc/kdbus/connection.c
> > index db49f282a1bf..b3c5f20a57d8 100644
> > --- a/ipc/kdbus/connection.c
> > +++ b/ipc/kdbus/connection.c
> > @@ -1229,12 +1229,12 @@ static int kdbus_conn_unicast(struct kdbus_conn
> > *src,
> > struct kdbus_staging *staging)
> > {
> > const struct kdbus_msg *msg = staging->msg;
> > - struct kdbus_name_entry *name = NULL;
> > + struct kdbus_name_entry *name;
> > struct kdbus_reply *wait = NULL;
> > struct kdbus_conn *dst = NULL;
> > struct kdbus_bus *bus = src->ep->bus;
> > bool is_signal = (msg->flags & KDBUS_MSG_SIGNAL);
> > - int ret = 0;
> > + int ret;
> >
> > if (WARN_ON(msg->dst_id == KDBUS_DST_ID_BROADCAST) ||
> > WARN_ON(!(msg->flags & KDBUS_MSG_EXPECT_REPLY) &&
> > @@ -1245,7 +1245,6 @@ static int kdbus_conn_unicast(struct kdbus_conn *src,
> > down_read(&bus->name_registry->rwlock);
> >
> > /* find and pin destination */
> > -
>
> If a comment is addressed to a whole following block, we usually put a
> newline after it. Only if the comment is only addressed at the next
> code-line, we don't.
Sorry, this change is here by mistake and shouldn't be in the patch at
all.
>
> > ret = kdbus_pin_dst(bus, staging, &name, &dst);
> > if (ret < 0)
> > goto exit;
> > @@ -1276,11 +1275,10 @@ static int kdbus_conn_unicast(struct kdbus_conn
> > *src,
> > kdbus_bus_eavesdrop(bus, src, staging);
> >
> > ret = kdbus_conn_entry_insert(src, dst, staging, wait, name);
> > - if (ret < 0 && !is_signal)
> > - goto exit;
> >
> > /* signals are treated like broadcasts, recv-errors are ignored */
> > - ret = 0;
> > + if (is_signal)
> > + ret = 0;
>
> Why? Just to reduce the line-count? You break the code-flow here, by
> making the success-path conditional, instead of the error-path.
IMO, it's easier to read as it's exacly what the comment says: ignore an
error in the case of signal. But I don't mind omitting this change from
the next submission.
>
> Thanks
> David
>
> >
> > exit:
> > up_read(&bus->name_registry->rwlock);
> > --
> > 1.8.3.1
> >
--
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/
