From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932090AbYGRUMi (ORCPT ); Fri, 18 Jul 2008 16:12:38 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1755472AbYGRUM1 (ORCPT ); Fri, 18 Jul 2008 16:12:27 -0400 Received: from out01.mta.xmission.com ([166.70.13.231]:34070 "EHLO out01.mta.xmission.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1760180AbYGRUMZ (ORCPT ); Fri, 18 Jul 2008 16:12:25 -0400 From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) To: WANG Cong Cc: LKML , kexec@lists.infradead.org References: <20080718150410.GB26261@hack.voiplan.pt> Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2008 13:07:58 -0700 In-Reply-To: <20080718150410.GB26261@hack.voiplan.pt> (WANG Cong's message of "Fri, 18 Jul 2008 16:04:10 +0100") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 24.130.11.59 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: ebiederm@xmission.com X-Spam-DCC: XMission; sa04 1397; Body=1 Fuz1=1 Fuz2=1 X-Spam-Combo: ;WANG Cong X-Spam-Relay-Country: X-Spam-Report: * -1.8 ALL_TRUSTED Passed through trusted hosts only via SMTP * 0.0 T_TM2_M_HEADER_IN_MSG BODY: T_TM2_M_HEADER_IN_MSG * -2.6 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1% * [score: 0.0004] * -0.0 DCC_CHECK_NEGATIVE Not listed in DCC * [sa04 1397; Body=1 Fuz1=1 Fuz2=1] * 0.0 XM_SPF_Neutral SPF-Neutral Subject: Re: [Patch] kexec: remove redundant if-else X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2 (built Thu, 03 Mar 2005 10:44:12 +0100) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mgr1.xmission.com) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org WANG Cong writes: > These if-else's can be removed. Why? That appears to be pointless code style thrashing. Converting code with a single return into code with multiple returns. Which arguably makes it harder to prove properties about. Further if you want to use the style you suggest a label name like err is better than the name out. But in this case where we have multiple results I don't like the proposed change in style at all. Especially with no rational. Eric