From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: SF Markus Elfring Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] Input-at32psif: Fine-tuning for OOM handling in psif_probe() Date: Sun, 3 Jul 2016 10:01:47 +0200 Message-ID: <7748f752-297e-fe5f-0517-eb65e2deec65@users.sourceforge.net> References: <566ABCD9.1060404@users.sourceforge.net> <4471604f-f401-bed9-39be-1aff2a92edf6@users.sourceforge.net> <1467492333.1968.5.camel@perches.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mout.web.de ([212.227.15.3]:58836 "EHLO mout.web.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750849AbcGCIC1 (ORCPT ); Sun, 3 Jul 2016 04:02:27 -0400 In-Reply-To: <1467492333.1968.5.camel@perches.com> Sender: linux-input-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-input@vger.kernel.org To: Joe Perches , Dmitry Torokhov , linux-input@vger.kernel.org Cc: LKML , kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org, Julia Lawall >> A few update suggestions were taken into account >> from static source code analysis. >> >> Markus Elfring (2): >> Return directly after a failed kzalloc() >> Remove two OOM messages >> >> drivers/input/serio/at32psif.c | 10 +++------- >> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) > > What possible rationale is there for including this "references" header? > 566ABCD9.1060404@users.sourceforge.net Do any more software developers dare to reconsider source code also around a jump label like "out"? > This message id is for your message: > "Source code review around jump label usage" > sent December 11, 2015! Can such an association with a bit of background information be occasionally useful for clarification of corresponding implementation details? Regards, Markus