Message-ID: <54E5C2A7.3060405@nexus-software.ie>
Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2015 11:01:59 +0000
From: "Bryan O'Donoghue" <pure.logic@nexus-software.ie>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
CC: kbuild test robot <fengguang.wu@intel.com>, kbuild-all@01.org,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
        x86@kernel.org, Andy Shevchenko <andy.schevchenko@gmail.com>,
        "Ong, Boon Leong" <boon.leong.ong@intel.com>,
        Darren Hart <dvhart@linux.intel.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/intel/quark: fix simple_return.cocci warnings
References: <201502191606.pTcFEBOs%fengguang.wu@intel.com> <20150219081432.GA21996@waimea> <54E5B6D6.6000308@nexus-software.ie> <20150219102509.GA2819@gmail.com> <54E5BB87.3020206@nexus-software.ie> <20150219103344.GD2819@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <20150219103344.GD2819@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 781
Lines: 35

On 19/02/15 10:33, Ingo Molnar wrote:

>> Feedback at review was that it's more consistent with the
>> code that comes before.
>
> But that feedback makes very little sense. In C we don't
> ever want to write:
>
> 	if (ret)
> 		return ret;
>
> 	return 0;
>
> Because we can return the fine value straight away:
>
> 	return ret;
>
> regardless of what comes before.

:)

Just trying to accommodate as much feedback from people as possible.

I'm fine with the change and I'll let Andy argue the counter-point if he 
wants to.

--
Bryan


--
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/