Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2016 08:38:16 -0400
From: Brian Masney <masneyb@onstation.org>
To: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>
Cc: jic23@kernel.org, devel@driverdev.osuosl.org, lars@metafoo.de,
        linux-iio@vger.kernel.org, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, pmeerw@pmeerw.net, knaack.h@gmx.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/7] iio: light: tsl2583: change functions to only have a
 single exit point
Message-ID: <20161019123816.GA6741@basecamp.onstation.org>
References: <1476873130-24926-1-git-send-email-masneyb@onstation.org>
 <1476873130-24926-2-git-send-email-masneyb@onstation.org>
 <20161019110859.GG4469@mwanda>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20161019110859.GG4469@mwanda>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 852
Lines: 18

On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 02:08:59PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 06:32:05AM -0400, Brian Masney wrote:
> > Change the following functions to only have a single exit point:
> > taos_i2c_read(), taos_als_calibrate(), taos_chip_on(),
> > taos_gain_store(), taos_gain_available_show(), taos_luxtable_store()
> > and taos_probe().
> > 
> 
> What's the point of this?  This style of code just makes things more
> complicated and leads to "forgot the error code" bugs.  People think
> that it future proofs the code in case we add locking but I have looked
> into this and it has minimal if any impact at preventing locking bugs.

The reason that I did this was due to the locking that I added later in
the patch series. Each function would only have a single call to
mutex_unlock(). I should have mentioned that in my message.

Brian