From: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH][1/2] SquashFS
Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2005 17:50:02 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <7vmzt4pdf9.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20050315110632.07fc8d09.pj@engr.sgi.com> (Paul Jackson's message of "Tue, 15 Mar 2005 11:06:32 -0800")
>>>>> "PJ" == Paul Jackson <pj@engr.sgi.com> writes:
PJ> There is not a concensus (nor a King Penguin dictate) between the
PJ> "while(1)" and "for(;;)" style to document.
FWIW, linux-0.01 has four uses of "while (1)" and two uses of
"for (;;)" ;-).
./fs/inode.c: while (1) {
./fs/namei.c: while (1) {
./fs/namei.c: while (1) {
./kernel/sched.c: while (1) {
./init/main.c: for(;;) pause();
./kernel/panic.c: for(;;);
What is interesting here is that the King Penguin used these two
constructs with consistency. The "while (1)" form was used with
normal exit routes with "if (...) break" inside; while the
"for(;;)" form was used only in unusual "the thread of control
should get stuck here forever" cases.
So, Phillip's decision to go back to his original while(1) style
seems to be in line with the style used in the original Linux
kernel ;-).
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-03-16 1:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-03-14 16:24 [PATCH][1/2] SquashFS Phillip Lougher
2005-03-15 0:38 ` Matt Mackall
2005-03-15 1:47 ` Nick Piggin
2005-03-15 2:33 ` Matt Mackall
2005-03-15 8:47 ` Paul Jackson
2005-03-15 15:50 ` Phillip Lougher
2005-03-15 17:27 ` Matt Mackall
2005-03-15 16:19 ` Phillip Lougher
2005-03-15 19:06 ` Paul Jackson
2005-03-16 1:50 ` Junio C Hamano [this message]
2005-03-16 7:14 ` Paul Jackson
2005-03-17 20:06 ` jerome lacoste
2005-03-15 0:51 ` Andrew Morton
2005-03-19 1:56 ` Kmap_atomic vs Kmap Phillip Lougher
2005-03-19 3:41 ` Andrew Morton
2005-03-20 23:11 ` Function stack size usage (was [PATCH][1/2] SquashFS) Phillip Lougher
2005-03-21 0:59 ` Andrew Morton
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=7vmzt4pdf9.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net \
--to=junkio@cox.net \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox