All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Santosh Shilimkar <santosh.shilimkar@ti.com>
To: "Premi, Sanjeev" <premi@ti.com>
Cc: "linux-omap@vger.kernel.org" <linux-omap@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] omap2+: pm: Use if...else instead of goto
Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2011 18:29:11 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4E048A1F.7000303@ti.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <B85A65D85D7EB246BE421B3FB0FBB593024D6C2EA4@dbde02.ent.ti.com>

On 6/24/2011 6:24 PM, Premi, Sanjeev wrote:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Shilimkar, Santosh
>> Sent: Friday, June 24, 2011 6:18 PM
>> To: Premi, Sanjeev
>> Cc: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org; linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
>> Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] omap2+: pm: Use if...else instead of goto
>>
>> On 6/24/2011 4:05 PM, Sanjeev Premi wrote:
>>> This patch replaces the use of goto with simple
>>> if...else syntax. No change in functionality.
>>>
>>> This also means that the comment describing the
>>> dependency between CONFIG_SMP and calculation
>>> of loops_per_jiffy can be unified.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Sanjeev Premi<premi@ti.com>
>>> ---
>> Don't see need of this patch as well considering your second patch.
>> So NAK.
>>
> [sp] May be it isn't needed - but it surely highlights some
>       bad code that does find way upstream.
>
If you think of using if else makes code better than use
of goto, then I just ignore your comment. Because that means
core scheduler code is also bad as per your remark which makes
use of goto.

Regards
Santosh

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: santosh.shilimkar@ti.com (Santosh Shilimkar)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] omap2+: pm: Use if...else instead of goto
Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2011 18:29:11 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4E048A1F.7000303@ti.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <B85A65D85D7EB246BE421B3FB0FBB593024D6C2EA4@dbde02.ent.ti.com>

On 6/24/2011 6:24 PM, Premi, Sanjeev wrote:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Shilimkar, Santosh
>> Sent: Friday, June 24, 2011 6:18 PM
>> To: Premi, Sanjeev
>> Cc: linux-omap at vger.kernel.org; linux-arm-kernel at lists.infradead.org
>> Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] omap2+: pm: Use if...else instead of goto
>>
>> On 6/24/2011 4:05 PM, Sanjeev Premi wrote:
>>> This patch replaces the use of goto with simple
>>> if...else syntax. No change in functionality.
>>>
>>> This also means that the comment describing the
>>> dependency between CONFIG_SMP and calculation
>>> of loops_per_jiffy can be unified.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Sanjeev Premi<premi@ti.com>
>>> ---
>> Don't see need of this patch as well considering your second patch.
>> So NAK.
>>
> [sp] May be it isn't needed - but it surely highlights some
>       bad code that does find way upstream.
>
If you think of using if else makes code better than use
of goto, then I just ignore your comment. Because that means
core scheduler code is also bad as per your remark which makes
use of goto.

Regards
Santosh

  reply	other threads:[~2011-06-24 12:59 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-06-24 10:35 [PATCH 0/2] omap2+: pm: Fix code syntax and BogoMIPS Sanjeev Premi
2011-06-24 10:35 ` Sanjeev Premi
2011-06-24 10:35 ` [PATCH 1/2] omap2+: pm: Use if...else instead of goto Sanjeev Premi
2011-06-24 10:35   ` Sanjeev Premi
2011-06-24 12:48   ` Santosh Shilimkar
2011-06-24 12:48     ` Santosh Shilimkar
2011-06-24 12:54     ` Premi, Sanjeev
2011-06-24 12:54       ` Premi, Sanjeev
2011-06-24 12:59       ` Santosh Shilimkar [this message]
2011-06-24 12:59         ` Santosh Shilimkar
2011-06-24 13:01         ` Premi, Sanjeev
2011-06-24 13:01           ` Premi, Sanjeev
2011-06-24 10:35 ` [PATCH 2/2] omap2+: pm: cpufreq: Fix loops_per_jiffy calculation Sanjeev Premi
2011-06-24 10:35   ` Sanjeev Premi
2011-06-24 10:43   ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-06-24 10:43     ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-06-24 10:48     ` Premi, Sanjeev
2011-06-24 10:48       ` Premi, Sanjeev
2011-06-24 10:51       ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-06-24 10:51         ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-06-24 11:11         ` Premi, Sanjeev
2011-06-24 11:11           ` Premi, Sanjeev
2011-06-24 12:45         ` Santosh Shilimkar
2011-06-24 12:45           ` Santosh Shilimkar
2011-06-24 12:52           ` Premi, Sanjeev
2011-06-24 12:52             ` Premi, Sanjeev
2011-06-24 13:01             ` Santosh Shilimkar
2011-06-24 13:01               ` Santosh Shilimkar

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=4E048A1F.7000303@ti.com \
    --to=santosh.shilimkar@ti.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-omap@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=premi@ti.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.