Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1762216AbYCXSpz (ORCPT ); Mon, 24 Mar 2008 14:45:55 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1757570AbYCXSpq (ORCPT ); Mon, 24 Mar 2008 14:45:46 -0400 Received: from smtp1.linux-foundation.org ([140.211.169.13]:53475 "EHLO smtp1.linux-foundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754647AbYCXSpp (ORCPT ); Mon, 24 Mar 2008 14:45:45 -0400 Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2008 11:45:18 -0700 From: Andrew Morton To: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?J=F6rn?= Engel Cc: adrian@newgolddream.dyndns.info, lethal@linux-sh.org, linux-sh@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] 2/3 mtd: add support for flash on the SEGA Dreamcast Visual Memory Unit Message-Id: <20080324114518.07533af9.akpm@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <20080324145433.GD2899@logfs.org> References: <1206207805.6324.13.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1206209035.6324.29.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20080322183200.GD19347@logfs.org> <1206211147.6324.48.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20080324020832.GA13935@linux-sh.org> <1206360384.6283.11.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20080324132101.GA2899@logfs.org> <1206367120.6283.15.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20080324141043.GB2899@logfs.org> <1206369796.6283.19.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20080324145433.GD2899@logfs.org> X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 2.2.4 (GTK+ 2.8.20; i486-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1433 Lines: 30 On Mon, 24 Mar 2008 15:54:33 +0100 J__rn Engel wrote: > On Mon, 24 March 2008 14:43:16 +0000, Adrian McMenamin wrote: > > > > Well, I haven't got round to applying them and testing them yet, though > > they look ok, obviously, except for one thing: I'm pretty much where you > > are on the goto versus return thing, but got pretty clear instructions > > on a previous patch from Andrew Morton that using gotos to ensure > > functions limit the number of return points is the way to go. > > > > I've added him back in now we aren't exchanging flames, so maybe he can > > pronouce ex cathedra. > > It is a matter of personal taste. Having a single return statement is > nice when using a debugger. One can set a single breakpoint instead of > ten. I guess that is why Andrew prefers it. Experience has shown that over time, the multiple-return-point approach leads to locking errors, resource leaks and to much duplicated unlocking/freeing code. Because when people add new locking and more dynamic allocations to the function they need to hunt down each `return' and add unlocking/freeing code to it (this is bad). And sometimes they miss one (this is worse). -- 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/