On Thu, Mar 02, 2017 at 10:23:45AM +0100, Victor Toso wrote: > Hi, > > On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 12:21:45PM +0100, Victor Toso wrote: > > From: Victor Toso <me@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > Hi, > > > > v2->v3: > > * Breaking spice_channel_read_wire() into smaller changes. (teuf) > > > > v2: https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/spice-devel/2017-February/035455.html > > v1: https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/spice-devel/2017-February/035446.html > > > > Cheers, > > > > Victor Toso (6): > > spice-channel: move out non blocking logic of _read_wire() > > spice-channel: move out non blocking logic of _flush_wire() > > spice_channel_read_wire: prefer while(TRUE) instead of goto > > spice_channel_read_wire: move variables to internal scope > > Any feedback on 3/6 and 4/6 ? I don't mind dropping the 5/6 and 6/6 > patches at all. They don't bring much benefit and it might be just > personal preference. I was looking at this series yesterday, and I'm not really convinced it brings much, the while (TRUE) which is iterated once at most is as weird as the goto, before the patch the code is ret = xxxx /* error handling depending on 'ret' value */ if (ret == xxx) { } ... /* nominal case */ This series changes this to emphasize the 'read would block, retry', but does not really describe why this is better, the initial organization looks better to me. Christophe
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Spice-devel mailing list Spice-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/spice-devel