Hello, On (Tue) May 18 2010 [13:41:29], Steven Liu wrote: > Hi, Amit, > > if 'err' initialised in this path, it needn't do err = -ENOMEM > after,isn't it? What I mean is if we later add some code that just does: if (err) goto fail; then 'ret' can be -ENOMEM, as it was initialised to, which would be fine. But if a later patch adds something like: + ret = -EIO; + err = ... + if (err) + goto fail; + err = ... if (err) goto fail; In this case, the 2nd if() would now return EIO instead of ENOMEM as earlier. Also, this style of coding can prevent uninitialised usage of 'ret', eg: int ret; if (err) goto fail; fail: return ret; In this case, the compiler will warn about 'ret' being used uninitialised. This is just a coding style issue. I had initially coded it the way your patch does, but Rusty asked me to change that and I like this new style better: there's less scope for surprises. Amit _______________________________________________ Virtualization mailing list Virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
