Re: [PATCH] staging: unisys: use common return path

[Ben Romer <benjamin.romer@unisys.com>]

On 12/01/2015 10:57 AM, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> What I meant was that I'm generally opposed to "common exit paths".
> Mixing all the exit paths together often makes the code more complicated
> and leads to errors.  That makes sense from a common sense perspective
> that doing many things is more difficult than doing one thing?  Anyway
> it's easy enough to verify empirically that this style is bug prone.
>
> On the other hand there are times where all exit paths need to unlock or
> to free a variable and in those cases using a common exit path makes
> sense.  Just don't standardize on "Every function should only have a
> single return".
>

That works for me. Mainly my issue with it is that I've spent a lot of 
time trying to eliminate "goto Away" code from the drivers, so I'd 
rather not put any back if possible.

>>
>> If we *have* to change it
>
> I don't think we have to change it at all.  Using direct returns makes
> finding locking bugs easier for static checkers.
>

That's true, and I think the code is fine as it is.

>> 		spin_unlock_irqrestore(&devdata->priv_lock, flags);
>
> This is a bug.
>

Indeed, but I'd rather not have any of these changes made anyway. This 
function isn't broken so it doesn't need to be fixed.

-- Ben