lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Oct]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [v4l-dvb-maintainer] [PATCH 3/3] V4L: cinergyT2, remove bad usage of ERESTARTSYS
    Marcel Siegert wrote:
    > Manu Abraham schrieb:
    >> Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote:
    >>> Em Qua, 2007-10-10 Ã s 11:59 -0400, Alan Cox escreveu:
    >>>> On Wed, Oct 10, 2007 at 12:35:41PM -0300, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote:
    >>>>> Em Qua, 2007-10-10 Ã s 00:18 -0400, Michael Krufky escreveu:
    >>>>>> Is this illegal as per kernel codingstyle?
    >>>>> Yes, it is. CodingStyle states:
    >>>> <rant>
    >>>> No.. "Illegal" means prohibited by law. Its merely wrong 8)
    >>>> </rant>
    >>> LOL
    >>>
    >>>>> The proper fix is just to replace the offended code by this:
    >>>>>
    >>>>> err=foo();
    >>>>> if (error)
    >>>>> goto error;
    >>>> Lots of code uses
    >>>>
    >>>> if ((err = foo()) < 0)
    >>>>
    >>>> so I would'y worry too much. The split one however clearer and also
    >>>> safer.
    >>> Yes, this is not a severe CodingStyle violation. Still, the above code
    >>> is better than the used one.
    >>>
    >>> Since, on your example, it is clear that the programmer wanted to test
    >>> if the value is less than zero.
    >>> The code:
    >>>
    >>> if ( (err=foo()) )
    >>>
    >>> should also indicate an operator mistake of using =, instead of ==.
    >>>
    >>> Probably, source code analyzers like Coverity will complain about the
    >>> above.
    >>>
    >>> If not violating CodingStyle, I would rather prefer to code this as:
    >>> if ( !(err=foo() ) or, even better, using:
    >>> if ( (err=foo()) != 0)
    >>>
    >>> clearly indicating that it is tested if the value is not zero.
    >>>
    >>> Even being a quite simple issue, I would prefer if Jiri can fix it.
    >>>
    >>
    >>
    >> When you have only some few lines of code you can write
    >>
    >> err = foo()
    >> if (err) {
    >> do whatever
    >> }
    >> doesn't matter ..
    >>
    >> But when you have hell a lot of code, checking error's what you
    >> mention is insane.
    >>
    >> ie,
    >>
    >> if ((err = foo()) expr ) is better.
    >>
    >> http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/2/4/56
    >>
    >> Manu
    >>
    > hi manu,
    >
    > it's not worth discussing this in a way like
    > "i know something from the past and that was a different solution".
    >

    didn't mean to look at it that way, because i had addressed my concerns
    at that time as well.

    > if you look to other parts in that thread like
    >
    > http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/2/3/150
    >
    > you will see that they came also to a kind of different solution,
    > NOT to use the 1-liner for assignment statements.
    >
    > it's more like a religious/personal discussion how to
    > struct/indent/format code.
    > and, to state my position for clear,


    It is. Sometimes i find such things in CodingStyle to be too silly.

    >
    > if kernel coding style document isnt updated to allow the constructions
    > of code that caused this discussion, we dont have to discuss but follow
    > the rules.
    >
    > anything else on this topic (coding style and it's sense) is to be
    > discussed on kernel ml.
    >

    Marcel, It is on LKML.

    Manu

    -
    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: 2007-10-10 19:07    [W:0.033 / U:31.592 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site