Re: [PATCH 5/7] staging: lustre: Less checks in mgc_process_recover_log() after error detection

[Dan Carpenter]

On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 01:04:14PM +0100, SF Markus Elfring wrote:
> >> A few checks would be performed by the mgc_process_recover_log() function
> >> even if it is known already that the passed variable "pages" contained
> >> a null pointer.
> >>
> >> * Let us return directly if a call of the kcalloc() function failed.
> >>
> >> * Move assignments for the variables "eof" and "req" behind
> >>   this memory allocation.
> > 
> > Why?
> 
> The positions of their initialisation depends on the selected exception 
> handling implementation, doesn't it?
> 
> Can you accept the proposed changes around the affected memory allocations?
> 

Just leave it as-is if there is no reason.

> 
> > Then in the next patch it moves again.
> 
> This detail is a matter of patch granularity.
> 
> 
> > It's like cup shuffle to read these patches sometimes.
> 
> Do you prefer to stash any changes together for a bigger update step?

Yes.  Patches 5 and 6 would be easier to review if they were folded into
one patch.

regards,
dan carpenter

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/