From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Guillaume Nault Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 6/6] ppp: add rtnetlink device creation support Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2016 10:21:07 +0200 Message-ID: <20160406082107.GA1620@alphalink.fr> References: <5703F356.6050107@bfs.de> <20160405212222.GD1305@alphalink.fr> <5704C2B0.6020504@bfs.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-ppp@vger.kernel.org, Paul Mackerras , David Miller To: walter harms Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5704C2B0.6020504@bfs.de> Sender: linux-ppp-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On Wed, Apr 06, 2016 at 10:02:56AM +0200, walter harms wrote: > > > Am 05.04.2016 23:22, schrieb Guillaume Nault: > > On Tue, Apr 05, 2016 at 07:18:14PM +0200, walter harms wrote: > >> > >> > >> Am 05.04.2016 02:56, schrieb Guillaume Nault: > >>> @@ -1043,12 +1048,39 @@ static int ppp_dev_configure(struct net *src_net, struct net_device *dev, > >>> const struct ppp_config *conf) > >>> { > >>> struct ppp *ppp = netdev_priv(dev); > >>> + struct file *file; > >>> int indx; > >>> + int err; > >>> + > >>> + if (conf->fd < 0) { > >>> + file = conf->file; > >>> + if (!file) { > >>> + err = -EBADF; > >>> + goto out; > >> > >> why not just return -EBADF; > >> > >>> + } > >>> + } else { > >>> + file = fget(conf->fd); > >>> + if (!file) { > >>> + err = -EBADF; > >>> + goto out; > >> > >> why not just return -EBADF; > >> > > Just because the 'out' label is declared anyway and because this > > centralises the return point. But I agree returning -EBADF directly > > could be more readable. I don't have strong opinion. > > in this special case i would go for readable. People tend to miss these > if > if > if > constructs. > Ok, I'll do that in v3.