Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sun, 12 Jan 2003 17:10:35 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sun, 12 Jan 2003 17:10:35 -0500 Received: from vitelus.com ([64.81.243.207]:61712 "EHLO vitelus.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Sun, 12 Jan 2003 17:10:33 -0500 Date: Sun, 12 Jan 2003 14:18:49 -0800 From: Aaron Lehmann To: Oliver Neukum Cc: robw@optonline.net, Rik van Riel , Matti Aarnio , Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: any chance of 2.6.0-test*? Message-ID: <20030112221849.GO31238@vitelus.com> References: <1042407845.3162.131.camel@RobsPC.RobertWilkens.com> <200301122312.41879.oliver@neukum.name> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200301122312.41879.oliver@neukum.name> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.3i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 565 Lines: 15 On Sun, Jan 12, 2003 at 11:12:41PM +0100, Oliver Neukum wrote: > Yes. Typical error cleanup looks like: > err_out: > up(&sem); > return err; > > Releasing a lock in another function is a crime punished by slow death. Not to mention that the 'return err;' statement is hard to move to an inline function meaningfully. - 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/