On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 08:38:16AM -0400, Brian Masney wrote: > On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 02:08:59PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 06:32:05AM -0400, Brian Masney wrote: > > > Change the following functions to only have a single exit point: > > > taos_i2c_read(), taos_als_calibrate(), taos_chip_on(), > > > taos_gain_store(), taos_gain_available_show(), taos_luxtable_store() > > > and taos_probe(). > > > > > > > What's the point of this? This style of code just makes things more > > complicated and leads to "forgot the error code" bugs. People think > > that it future proofs the code in case we add locking but I have looked > > into this and it has minimal if any impact at preventing locking bugs. > > The reason that I did this was due to the locking that I added later in > the patch series. Each function would only have a single call to > mutex_unlock(). I should have mentioned that in my message. This kind of trick does not work in real life. I have looked at it. In theory, it should work but in real life, empirically, it does not and it introduces additional new bugs. People are always looking for a magic bullet but there is no such thing. The best approach is just to write the simplest, clearest code that you can. regards, dan carpenter -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-iio" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
