From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andrew Morton Subject: Re: [PATCH] drivers: virtio: Use PTR_RET function Date: Mon, 25 Mar 2013 22:01:50 -0700 Message-ID: <20130325220150.af9795a7.akpm@linux-foundation.org> References: <1364217936-6284-1-git-send-email-gheorghiuandru@gmail.com> <87fvzidenm.fsf@rustcorp.com.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <87fvzidenm.fsf@rustcorp.com.au> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: virtualization-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org Errors-To: virtualization-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org To: Rusty Russell Cc: Alexandru Gheorghiu , virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org, Uwe =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Kleine-K=F6nig?= , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, "Michael S. Tsirkin" List-Id: virtualization@lists.linuxfoundation.org On Tue, 26 Mar 2013 13:57:09 +1030 Rusty Russell wrote: > Alexandru Gheorghiu writes: > > > Used PTR_RET function instead of IS_ERR and PTR_ERR. > > Patch found using coccinelle. > > WTF is PTR_RET? PTR_RET doesn't return anything. Why is it called > that? It doesn't even make sense. > > ZERO_OR_PTR_ERR() maybe. > > But what problem are we solving? Insufficient churn in the tree? Code > being too readable? This isn't some hard-to-get right corner case, or a > missed optimization. > > Andrew, what am I missing here? It seemed like a good idea at the time. Merged it two years ago and have since been keenly awaiting an opportunity to use it. It seems that people _have_ been using it, but mainly netfilter people and we know they're all crazy ;)