On Mon, Jul 18, 2016 at 12:24:11PM +0200, Johannes Thumshirn wrote: > On Mon, Jul 18, 2016 at 02:13:33AM -0800, Kent Overstreet wrote: > > On Mon, Jul 18, 2016 at 12:11:09PM +0200, Johannes Thumshirn wrote: > > > bcache's cache_alloc() function currenty has no way freeing memory if one of > > > the allocations fails. Untangle the if + allocation statement so we have > > > defined checkpoints to free previous allocations if one fails. > > > > nack. The existing error path handles failure midway through just fine. > > Come on, the patch improves the readability of the if statement by some orders > of magnitude as well. > > Are you OK with it if I change the subject/commit log? No, it's just churn and I don't agree that it improves readability. On the contrary, now the cleanup code has to be duplicated in two places - which invites them getting out of sync and introducing bugs. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-bcache" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
