From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S932375AbcH1H2n (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Sun, 28 Aug 2016 03:28:43 -0400
Received: from mout.web.de ([212.227.17.12]:61937 "EHLO mout.web.de"
        rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
        id S932323AbcH1H2l (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Sun, 28 Aug 2016 03:28:41 -0400
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/8] cris-cryptocop: Move an assignment for the variable
 "nooutpages" in cryptocop_ioctl_process()
To: Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@lip6.fr>
References: <566ABCD9.1060404@users.sourceforge.net>
 <bfc23090-e05d-f491-2a28-1803ceb31a31@users.sourceforge.net>
 <2a70980b-54e3-812c-b76e-6b64640c469c@users.sourceforge.net>
 <alpine.DEB.2.10.1608272107070.3363@hadrien>
Cc: linux-cris-kernel@axis.com,
        Adam Buchbinder <adam.buchbinder@gmail.com>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
        Jesper Nilsson <jesper.nilsson@axis.com>,
        Jiri Kosina <jkosina@suse.cz>, Mikael Starvik <starvik@axis.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org,
        Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
From: SF Markus Elfring <elfring@users.sourceforge.net>
Message-ID: <02c343e7-a7ac-26d1-4e79-ae50d3ec6dbb@users.sourceforge.net>
Date: Sun, 28 Aug 2016 09:28:04 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/45.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.10.1608272107070.3363@hadrien>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:3r5BKC/CSlIHh54vmtnuCh90mf25dTbSKrSZwFUxBmutUa1WFhw
 bst5LkpbqaG6Q9YG14K2TcYsDFoYji9i29Pvq15VKKQMgRGPsTki114n+l3aE7vXYCnMXgj
 t2U8T5oUSCoGVTqIos5K5Yekq6NoOTiPNZEtwvzYTPgyHihpl/Sm+0KkcdKBxRAvT8GkJVa
 lEjpeHFafzm8G0jRsemhg==
X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:TofTw5EcmU8=:fINpj183qG14+H7XURDP2C
 QND9uhWL2dOJxpU/mkinxyC+5+PaXa2DTx9F2lmFRcbYWGl4Ko79TvQW6hovG3cAuzNk/U28B
 Xntv+0wxK6fiWAB+d4UDkSvU/RsWvHFnnbFd0fXir874EBktvqgnwUo2jsmAz/YFKCHoPaqH6
 GuqHpxSpb+5T3TjNHP/g+Ovn7JVJYwOaCBiYxDGqjQuyJyZKjx4ZYGbSZmts2TS5NCI7mJnPc
 AMzWxrYeVlaC744mlSnNs018YOReAYsQ+xE31q9cNkE5YhnFpYkhrdnrQ1bWPfin4UEC59F/w
 rp3LDa7EUUzqiry6yisbywkzC2iXz3h9fo2naeY9/eI1JZC0kbyTwojIUrwNq7FAev0BmUwZ5
 uWgQ1OHDSp5j9CHgGfX6wCrlQlUa7vIGlUvToscYUkE7+eLqYcR+9yRcL3r/RBLFJx1SSNrq8
 EgDXg62JPL2W2bk1U75tCe+6WGACdh+8yqsduGHhj0voY51Ks3XzCVh0JaE4mbgZNlij2eHQM
 2Qugim5gADOKzbVnJZFGrUOTNCIJ41wJjDGMyE7JtCzJssOT6Sj99s5vAm9iwuEzjIG9U/S76
 pz/djkQo78ic08a9moejiwSxiRVMz3zBPsh6PVWeahZutpHIQhkHIU7auFwfybTh+GyXe9m9A
 Q5iFNUSWYzEIAH9Ak39BKqqiIAOdeaBXFZI0zpu3JgoXqXD6sbfosFUT8j8931QgQthVpec1H
 GeRUSGPzWc7vYcgjuvuYgRLJLf8mfJSnufwV+rAKEF7K97sbPUl8gWNCOxOYRAex0+524TRf8
 W9DcUVn
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

>> +++ b/arch/cris/arch-v32/drivers/cryptocop.c
>> @@ -2469,7 +2469,7 @@ static int cryptocop_ioctl_process(struct inode *inode, struct file *filp, unsig
>>  	struct page                     **inpages = NULL;
>>  	struct page                     **outpages = NULL;
>>  	int                             noinpages = 0;
>> -	int                             nooutpages = 0;
>> +	int                             nooutpages;
>>
>>  	struct cryptocop_desc           descs[5]; /* Max 5 descriptors are needed, there are three transforms that
>>  						   * can get connected/disconnected on different places in the indata. */
>> @@ -2695,6 +2695,8 @@ static int cryptocop_ioctl_process(struct inode *inode, struct file *filp, unsig
>>  			err = -ENOMEM;
>>  			goto free_inpages;
>>  		}
>> +	} else {
>> +		nooutpages = 0;
> 
> Why is it better?  4 characters have becomes 2 lines.

I suggest to express in a more precise way where this variable is needed actually.

* It would also be an update candidate for the refactoring "Reduce the scope of a variable", wouldn't it?

* Or would the refactoring "Split the implementation of a function into further functions" more appropriate here?

Regards,
Markus