On Tue, Dec 01, 2015 at 11:16:16AM -0500, Ben Romer wrote: > On 12/01/2015 10:57 AM, Dan Carpenter wrote: > >What I meant was that I'm generally opposed to "common exit paths". > >Mixing all the exit paths together often makes the code more complicated > >and leads to errors. That makes sense from a common sense perspective > >that doing many things is more difficult than doing one thing? Anyway > >it's easy enough to verify empirically that this style is bug prone. > > > >On the other hand there are times where all exit paths need to unlock or > >to free a variable and in those cases using a common exit path makes > >sense. Just don't standardize on "Every function should only have a > >single return". > > > > That works for me. Mainly my issue with it is that I've spent a lot > of time trying to eliminate "goto Away" code from the drivers, so > I'd rather not put any back if possible. But what is wrong with goto? Quoting from CodingStyle: "The goto statement comes in handy when a function exits from multiple locations and some common work such as cleanup has to be done. If there is no cleanup needed then just return directly." I am absolutely fine if you don't want it to be applied but just for knowing - It has multiple exits. In this case spin_unlock_irqrestore() is the common work. regards sudip _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
