Re: [PATCH RESEND] Eliminate extra 'out_free' label from fcoe_init function

Julia Lawall
2017-06-02T16:07:51Z

On Fri, 2 Jun 2017, walter harms wrote:

>
>
> Am 02.06.2017 14:39, schrieb Milan P. Gandhi:
> > Simplify the check for return code of fcoe_if_init routine
> > in fcoe_init function such that we could eliminate need for
> > extra 'out_free' label and duplicate mutex_unlock statement.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Milan P. Gandhi <mgandhi@redhat.com>
> > ---
> > drivers/scsi/fcoe/fcoe.c | 7 +++----
> > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/scsi/fcoe/fcoe.c b/drivers/scsi/fcoe/fcoe.c
> > index ea21e7b..a2cf3d0 100644
> > --- a/drivers/scsi/fcoe/fcoe.c
> > +++ b/drivers/scsi/fcoe/fcoe.c
> > @@ -2523,14 +2523,13 @@ static int __init fcoe_init(void)
> > fcoe_dev_setup();
> >
> > rc = fcoe_if_init();
> > + mutex_unlock(&fcoe_config_mutex);
> > +
> > if (rc)
> > - goto out_free;
> > + goto out_destroy;
> >
> > - mutex_unlock(&fcoe_config_mutex);
> > return 0;
> >
> if you do that, why not
> if (!rc) return 0;

I agree with Dan. If's should be for failures.

julia

>
> re,
> wh
>
>
>
> > -out_free:
> > - mutex_unlock(&fcoe_config_mutex);
> > out_destroy:
> > destroy_workqueue(fcoe_wq);
> > return rc;
> > --
> > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-janitors" in
> > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> >
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-janitors" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>