>>>> See also: >>>> https://lore.kernel.org/cocci/87b65f8e-abde-2aff-4da8-df6e0b464677@xxxxxx/ >>>> https://sympa.inria.fr/sympa/arc/cocci/2023-03/msg00115.html >>> >>> I will queue cleanup patches 1-2, >> >> Thanks for this positive feedback. > > Sorry, these patches do not apply to master branch and patch 1 > is no longer correct in master branch and the new mount api changes. Do you want that I adapt the linked development ideas to the current situation a bit more? >>> but I do not like patches 3/4 and 4/4. >>> I do not think that they make the code better to read or maintain. >> >> I would appreciate if the details for such change reluctance can be clarified better. > > patch 3: > I much rather a single error handling label that takes care of > all the cleanups - it is harder to make mistakes and jump to > the wrong label when adding new error conditions. There are different coding style preferences involved. See also: https://wiki.sei.cmu.edu/confluence/display/c/MEM12-C.+Consider+using+a+goto+chain+when+leaving+a+function+on+error+when+using+and+releasing+resources > patch 4: > Overlayfs uses this coding style all over the place > > err = -ENOMEM; > ofs->creator_cred = cred = prepare_creds(); > if (!cred) > goto out_free_ofs; > > I don't see the benefit in making err = -ENOMEM conditional. > I don't see the style after your patch as clearly better than before. Can it be nicer to set error codes only in exceptional data processing situations? Regards, Markus
