From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261511AbVFTUKt (ORCPT ); Mon, 20 Jun 2005 16:10:49 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261449AbVFTUGu (ORCPT ); Mon, 20 Jun 2005 16:06:50 -0400 Received: from e32.co.us.ibm.com ([32.97.110.130]:36593 "EHLO e32.co.us.ibm.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261553AbVFTTwB (ORCPT ); Mon, 20 Jun 2005 15:52:01 -0400 Message-ID: <42B71E41.7080400@austin.ibm.com> Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2005 14:51:29 -0500 From: Joel Schopp Reply-To: jschopp@austin.ibm.com User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.3) Gecko/20040910 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Christoph Lameter CC: Jeff Garzik , Telemaque Ndizihiwe , torvalds@osdl.org, akpm@osdl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] Replaces two GOTO statements with one IF_ELSE statement in /fs/open.c References: <42B70E62.5070704@pobox.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Christoph Lameter wrote: > On Mon, 20 Jun 2005, Jeff Garzik wrote: > > >>If you don't like goto, don't read kernel code! > > > But his patch also cleans up a code quit a bit. As a wider question, what is the practice for accepting patches without functional changes that simply clean up code and make it look better? BTW, I also agree that the gotos in this case keep the normal code flow cleaner, while making the exceptions isolated well.