Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 27 Apr 2006 14:09:51 +0200 | From | Jörn Engel <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 02/16] ehca: module infrastructure |
| |
On Thu, 27 April 2006 12:48:05 +0200, Heiko J Schick wrote: > > + if (ehca_module->cache_pd == NULL) {
Hmm.
> + ret = kmem_cache_destroy(ehca_module->cache_pd); > + if (ret != 0)
The " != 0" is completely superfluous. Above NULL check is a matter of taste, this one demonstates lack of boolean algebra understanding.
> + rblock = kzalloc(H_CB_ALIGNMENT, GFP_KERNEL); > + if (!rblock) {
Hmm. And your taste seems to change. :)
> + if (ehca_hw_level == 0) {
And since we're on the subject. Ignoring the recent discussion involving akpm, viro and others, the kernel historically used int both for integer and boolean, plus return values as a special kind of "boolean with error indication attached".
For boolean, it is nicer to do things like "if (!error)", for integers, a comparison as above is nicer. Return codes fall into the boolean category. Pointers after kmalloc() and similar are viewed as rich boolean by some people, but not by all.
Jörn
-- Geld macht nicht glücklich. Glück macht nicht satt. - 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/
| |