lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Feb]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
SubjectRe: A CodingStyle suggestion
From
On Sat, Feb 03, 2007 at 11:56:16PM +0100, Richard Knutsson wrote:
> Ahmed S. Darwish wrote:
> >Hi all,
> >
> >In CodingStyle Chapter 16 "Function return value and names", why not
> >adding a comment about the favorable community way of checking the return
> >value. ie:
> >
> >ret = do_method();
> >if (ret) {
> > /* deal with error */
> >}
> >
> >and not other ways like:
> >
> >if (do_method()) or
> So:
>
> if (is_true()) {
> /* do something */
> }
>
> is alright then? If so, I agree, but please make it real clear in the
> document ;)

Good catch :). A small grep of `access_ok' reveals that it's always used in the
form of:
if (!access_ok()) { .. }
I can conclude that verbal/imperative methods like `kmalloc, add_work' be
checked as:
ret = do_work();
if (ret) { ... }
and predicate methods like `acess_ok, pci_dev_present' be checked like:
if (!access_ok) { ... }
if (pci_dev_present) { ...}
Any comments ?

--
Ahmed S. Darwish
http://darwish-07.blogspot.com
-
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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2007-02-04 01:09    [W:0.109 / U:0.880 seconds]
©2003-2014 Jasper Spaans. Advertise on this site