Re: [PATCH V3] acpi: apei: clear error status before acknowledging the error

[Andy Shevchenko]

On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 9:27 PM, Borislav Petkov <bp@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 08:44:21PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>> For my opinion, since you asked, the either case needs a comment on
>> top of that additional check.
>
> That's because the comment belongs to the v2 part of the check.
>
>> Separate conditionals in independent cases are, of course, better.
>
> Yes, and separate are easier to read if you read them like this:
>
> +       if (rc == -ENOENT)
> +               return rc;
>
> <--- Ok, we got the missing entry out of the way, now, here, we have a
> valid entry. Now we can concentrate on processing it further.
>
>         ... other check and ack and ...
>
> And this becomes a lot more natural when you're staring at a big function
> which does a lot of things and you concentrate only on the main path.
>
> Oh, and this is how those checks get translated to asm as there you
> don't really have compound if-statements. So if you switch your mind to
> reading such checks separately, you're practically ready to read their
> asm translation too...
>
> Anyway, this is how I see it.
>
> --
> Regards/Gruss,
>     Boris.
>
> SUSE Linux GmbH, GF: Felix ImendÃrffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton, HRB 21284 (AG NÃrnberg)
> --



-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko