Re: [PATCH v1 05/20] signal: flatten do_send_sig_info()

[Eric W. Biederman]

Christian Brauner <christian@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:

2> On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 07:28:27AM -0500, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>> Christian Brauner <christian@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>> 
>> > Let's return early when lock_task_sighand() fails and move send_signal()
>> > and unlock_task_sighand() out of the if block.
>> 
>> Introducing multiple exits into a function.  Ick.
>> You do know that is what Dijkstra was arguing against in his paper
>> "Goto Considered Harmful"
>> 
>> That introduces mutiple exits and makes the function harder to analyze.
>> It is especially a pain as I have something in my queue that will
>> shuffle things around and remove the possibility of lock_task_sighand
>> failing.
>
> I'm happy to drop this one if you have a fix for this in your tree
> anyway.
>
> Aside from that, I think it might make sense to route this patch series
> through your tree though since you're doing the siginfo rework
> currently.(?)

If you will purely code style changes such as this one I will be happy
to pick up the rest as they are pretty much obviously correct changes.

Eric