From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andi Drebes Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2007 16:20:55 +0000 Subject: Re: [patch 3/3] fs/cramfs/inode.c: remove error variable Message-Id: <200708311820.55465.lists-receive@programmierforen.de> List-Id: References: <200708301737.49018.lists-receive@programmierforen.de> In-Reply-To: <200708301737.49018.lists-receive@programmierforen.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org Am Freitag, 31. August 2007 18:12 schrieb Nishanth Aravamudan: > On 31.08.2007 [13:43:18 +0200], Richard Knutsson wrote: > > Andi Drebes wrote: > > >This patch removes a variable from fs/cramfs/inode.c that is just used to > > >store > > >a return value which is immediately read afterwards. > > > > > >Tested on an i386 box. > > >Signed-off-by: Andi Drebes > > >--- > > >diff --git a/fs/cramfs/inode.c b/fs/cramfs/inode.c > > >index 350680f..42d2cf8 100644 > > >--- a/fs/cramfs/inode.c > > >+++ b/fs/cramfs/inode.c > > >@@ -372,7 +372,7 @@ static int cramfs_readdir(struct file *filp, void > > >*dirent, filldir_t filldir) > > > char *name; > > > ino_t ino; > > > mode_t mode; > > >- int namelen, error; > > >+ int namelen; > > > > > > mutex_lock(&read_mutex); > > > de = cramfs_read(sb, OFFSET(inode) + offset, > > > sizeof(*de)+CRAMFS_MAXPATHLEN); > > >@@ -398,8 +398,7 @@ static int cramfs_readdir(struct file *filp, void > > >*dirent, filldir_t filldir) > > > break; > > > namelen--; > > > } > > >- error = filldir(dirent, buf, namelen, offset, ino, mode >> > > >12); > > >- if (error) > > >+ if(filldir(dirent, buf, namelen, offset, ino, mode >> 12)) > > > > > Maybe picky but please leave it as "if (". > > Beyond that, I just don't like this change. I thought the preferred way > for these types of statements was the previous version. That is: > > error = filldir(...); > if (error) > error stuff > > Rather than a conditional with potential side-effects? OK. Maybe I exaggerated a little bit with this change. The most important ones are those in patch 1/3 and 2/3. Maybe the best thing is to abolish the last patch that deals with the error variable and to apply only the first two patches. I didn't really get why "if (foo)" is better than "if(foo)". Is it just a matter of style? Thanks for your comments. cheers, Andi