Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 22 May 2014 16:54:07 -0700 | From | Cody P Schafer <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v2] powerpc/perf/hv-24x7: use kmem_cache instead of aligned stack allocations |
| |
On 05/22/2014 04:49 PM, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi Cody, > > On Thu, 22 May 2014 15:44:25 -0700 Cody P Schafer <cody@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote: >> >> if (ret) { >> if (success_expected) >> pr_err_ratelimited("hcall failed: %d %#x %#x %d => 0x%lx (%ld) detail=0x%x failing ix=%x\n", >> domain, offset, ix, lpar, >> ret, ret, >> - result_buffer.buf.detailed_rc, >> - result_buffer.buf.failing_request_ix); >> - return ret; >> + result_buffer->buf.detailed_rc, >> + result_buffer->buf.failing_request_ix); >> + goto out_hcall; >> } >> >> - *res = be64_to_cpu(result_buffer.result); >> + *res = be64_to_cpu(result_buffer->result); > > not a biggie, but this last bit could be (remove the goto out_hcall and > teh label and then) > > } else { > *res = be64_to_cpu(result_buffer->result); > } >
I've got a slight preference toward keeping it as is, which lets all of the non-error path code stay outside of if/else blocks (and the error handling is kept ever so slightly more consistent).
>> +out_hcall: >> + kfree(result_buffer); >> +out_resb: >> + kfree(request_buffer); >> +out_reqb: >> return ret; >> } >> > > otherwise looks good to me. >
| |