Message-ID: <1402970429.2797.3.camel@joe-AO725>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] checkpatch: Warn on unnecessary void function return
 statements
From: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>
To: Anish Bhatt <anish@chelsio.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2014 19:00:29 -0700
In-Reply-To: <539F8F62.4000805@chelsio.com>
References: <1401728316.5770.9.camel@joe-AO725>
	 <1402961300-17985-1-git-send-email-anish@chelsio.com>
	 <1402964898.11561.2.camel@joe-AO725> <539F8F62.4000805@chelsio.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org

On Mon, 2014-06-16 at 17:44 -0700, Anish Bhatt wrote:
> My code has multiple exit lables:
> void function(void)
> {
> 	...
> 
> 	if (err1)
> 		goto exit1;
> 	...
> 	if (err2)
> 		goto exit2;
> 
> 	...
> 	return; /* Good return, no errors */
> exit1:
> 	printk(err1);
> 	return;
> exit2:
> 	printk(err2);
> }
> 
> The single tabbed return was required to prevent the good return & err1 
> messages cascading down. The extra exit label with a noop looks weird, 
> but is passing checkpatch.pl --strict, so I will go with that, thanks.
> -Anish
> 

Hmm, those return uses seem reasonable
to me.

Perhaps the test should warn only on
this specific 3 line sequence:

[any line but a label]
	return;
}

Andrew?  Anyone else?  Opinions?

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/