On Fri, 16 Mar 2007 11:14:51 -0500 James Bottomley wrote: > On Fri, 2007-03-16 at 08:06 -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote: > > On Fri, 16 Mar 2007 09:27:26 -0500 James Bottomley wrote: > > > > > On Fri, 2007-03-16 at 16:05 +0900, Horms wrote: > > > > + err = pci_enable_device(pdev); > > > > + if (err < 0) > > > > + return err; > > > > > > Traditionally, this should be > > > > > > if (err) > > > return err; > > > > > > The reason is that <0 is a signed comparison which can be slightly more > > > expensive on some architectures and it's unnecessary if zero is the only > > > successful return. > > > > Tradition vs. Linus, eh? Linus wrote (2007-Mar-06, on lkml, > > Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0703060817060.5963@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>): > > Sure ... we can all maintain our own traditions .. what was the subject > of this email? The subject was coding style and return/error codes. The Subject: line was: Re: [5/6] 2.6.21-rc2: known regressions --- ~Randy *** Remember to use Documentation/SubmitChecklist when testing your code *** - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
