On 09/23/2015 11:03 AM, David Ahern wrote:
If you have a better suggestion for how to improve this code then
please submit it. I don't have a religion here. I don't like making
mistakes and the silly mistake that led to bde6f9ded1 motivated this
patch series.
I'll take a stab at it. If you d
From: David Ahern
Date: Wed, 23 Sep 2015 12:03:03 -0600
> They add a lot of value. They make each change very easy to follow. No
> one is going to pickup a single patch in this series and backport to
> some kernel. Each is dependent on the one before it. Given that I
> would rather waste a few st
From: Alexander Duyck
Date: Wed, 23 Sep 2015 09:31:06 -0700
> It is the general direction of this I don't like since it is just
> making the code uglier before you attempt to fix it.
I agree, I don't like these refactorings at all.
Some of these code paths have been this way for a decade or lon
On 9/23/15 11:38 AM, Alexander Duyck wrote:
On 09/23/2015 10:13 AM, David Ahern wrote:
On 9/23/15 10:31 AM, Alexander Duyck wrote:
Just as you said, that code would be an intermediate step. Going though
and adding more points where you are updating err and just exchanging
one jump label for an
On 09/23/2015 10:13 AM, David Ahern wrote:
On 9/23/15 10:31 AM, Alexander Duyck wrote:
Just as you said, that code would be an intermediate step. Going though
and adding more points where you are updating err and just exchanging
one jump label for another doesn't help anything. You are better
On 9/23/15 10:31 AM, Alexander Duyck wrote:
Just as you said, that code would be an intermediate step. Going though
and adding more points where you are updating err and just exchanging
one jump label for another doesn't help anything. You are better off
pulling apart the spaghetti right from
On 09/23/2015 09:02 AM, David Ahern wrote:
On 9/23/15 9:45 AM, Alexander Duyck wrote:
On 09/23/2015 08:15 AM, David Ahern wrote:
e_inval has 1 explicit user and 1 fallthrough user --
martian_destination.
Move setting err to EINVAL before the 2 users and use the goto out
label
instead of e_inv
On 9/23/15 9:45 AM, Alexander Duyck wrote:
On 09/23/2015 08:15 AM, David Ahern wrote:
e_inval has 1 explicit user and 1 fallthrough user --
martian_destination.
Move setting err to EINVAL before the 2 users and use the goto out label
instead of e_inval.
Signed-off-by: David Ahern
---
net/ipv
On 09/23/2015 08:15 AM, David Ahern wrote:
e_inval has 1 explicit user and 1 fallthrough user -- martian_destination.
Move setting err to EINVAL before the 2 users and use the goto out label
instead of e_inval.
Signed-off-by: David Ahern
---
net/ipv4/route.c | 7 +++
1 file changed, 3 in
e_inval has 1 explicit user and 1 fallthrough user -- martian_destination.
Move setting err to EINVAL before the 2 users and use the goto out label
instead of e_inval.
Signed-off-by: David Ahern
---
net/ipv4/route.c | 7 +++
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/net/i
e_inval has 1 explicit user and 1 fallthrough user -- martian_destination.
Move setting err to EINVAL before the 2 users and use the goto out label
instead of e_inval.
Signed-off-by: David Ahern
---
net/ipv4/route.c | 7 +++
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/net/i
11 matches
Mail list logo
