On 14/06/2023 17.13, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > When reading such a code the following questions are arisen: > 1) Can the positive return value be the case? > 2) If so, what is the meaning of a such? > 3) Why do we not care about it? > > All this can simply gone if we use > > ret = foo(...); > if (ret) > return ret; > > As it's clear that whatever is non-zero we accept as something to be promoted > to the upper layer. I hope this explains my position. But we're in a context (in this case an ->ioctl method) where _our_ caller expects 0/-ESOMETHING, so returning something positive would be a bug - i.e., either way of spelling that if(), the reader must know that foo() also has those 0/-ESOMETHING semantics. I honestly didn't think much about it, but looking at the existing code and the stuff I add, all other places actually do 'if (ret)', so I've updated this site for consistency. Rasmus
