Re: [PATCH 2/3] can: fix oops caused by wrong rtnl dellink usage

[Oliver Hartkopp]

On 06/28/2016 09:36 AM, Holger Schurig wrote:
static void can_dellink(struct net_device *dev, struct list_head *head);
and

static void can_dellink(struct net_device *dev, struct list_head *head)
{
        return;
}

Wouldn't the canonical form be this:

static void can_dellink(struct net_device *dev, struct list_head *head)
{
}


- the curly braces make sure this isn't a forward definition
- but no useless return either


But then again, this "return" is only cosmetical.

Yes it is just coding style.

> No compiler will
generate any code from it.

ACK.

If you check

        ~/linux$ git grep \{\ return\;

there are many occurrences of empty void functions having a 'return' 
inside the curly braces.

I think

        static void can_dellink( ... ){}

would have made it too.

Now can_dellink() just locks similar to can_newlink() some lines above.

Regards,
Oliver