> diff -uNr ../master/linux-2.4.7-ac3/mm/memory.c linux/mm/memory.c
> --- ../master/linux-2.4.7-ac3/mm/memory.c Thu Aug 2 01:48:23 2001
> +++ linux/mm/memory.c Thu Aug 2 01:50:12 2001
> @@ -1041,17 +1041,10 @@
> }
> }
> inode->i_size = offset;
> - if (inode->i_op && inode->i_op->truncate)
> - {
> - /* This doesnt scale but it is meant to be a 2.4 invariant */
> - lock_kernel();
> - inode->i_op->truncate(inode);
> - unlock_kernel();
> - }
> - return 0;
> -
> +
> out_truncate:
> if (inode->i_op && inode->i_op->truncate) {
> + /* This doesnt scale but it is meant to be a 2.4 invariant */
> lock_kernel();
> inode->i_op->truncate(inode);
> unlock_kernel();
I disagree. It is the style to have a function trip exceptions
by doing goto out_something. Those exceptions are stacked
in the fall through fashion, but the success case IS NOT.
By implemention this factorization you save several bytes
and make just everyone to wonder if there is a bug or mispatch
with missing "return 0" case here.
-- Pete
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Aug 07 2001 - 21:00:15 EST