From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932324AbaKMIvF (ORCPT ); Thu, 13 Nov 2014 03:51:05 -0500 Received: from mout.web.de ([212.227.15.4]:58524 "EHLO mout.web.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932170AbaKMIvD (ORCPT ); Thu, 13 Nov 2014 03:51:03 -0500 Message-ID: <546470D8.9050603@users.sourceforge.net> Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2014 09:50:32 +0100 From: SF Markus Elfring User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Dan Carpenter CC: Greg Kroah-Hartman , devel@driverdev.osuosl.org, trivial@kernel.org, kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Coccinelle Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] staging: rtl8188eu: Better memory clean-up in efuse_phymap_to_logical() References: <5317A59D.4@users.sourceforge.net> <544954FD.8040607@users.sourceforge.net> <20141029084702.GA18675@kroah.com> <5453CD0D.9010206@users.sourceforge.net> <5463C10D.6020409@users.sourceforge.net> <5463C373.5050804@users.sourceforge.net> <20141112211438.GI6749@mwanda> <5463D62D.3010206@users.sourceforge.net> <20141112220540.GK5351@mwanda> In-Reply-To: <20141112220540.GK5351@mwanda> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:3VpKZ3t/S0kKAiGKDmD/XFjACXqUvUilcdT/eGChJeOgjVW4L/z 6Kkp/iRLnFx1iYS9RxVnRbC41ePqbXrl1X9IbFgiMb9/pv0Z6Yo2VU5aRDJAfgqYGN3/aol w0DMFnxZYHrky3lIgiuxTW7Pxu+I/4lX116Oy5a8QEDfIMgaIOgOHbNefMfsygCzx3QVoYA 0RovJ966Heeug7b9TJBDQ== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1; Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org >>>> + goto cleanup1; >>> >>> 1) Don't use GW-BASIC label names. Label names should reflect what the >>> label does such as free_fuse_word or free_fuse_tabel. >>> >>> 2) Don't use do-nothing labels. Just return directly. >> >> Does the document "CodingStyle" need any extensions for special cases? > > I don't understand. Should the naming convention become more explicit for jump labels? > CodingStyle says: > > "If there is no cleanup needed then just return directly." Do you want that I send another update suggestion with other corrections for jump labels in the affected function implementation? Regards, Markus From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: SF Markus Elfring Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2014 08:50:32 +0000 Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] staging: rtl8188eu: Better memory clean-up in efuse_phymap_to_logical() Message-Id: <546470D8.9050603@users.sourceforge.net> List-Id: References: <5317A59D.4@users.sourceforge.net> <544954FD.8040607@users.sourceforge.net> <20141029084702.GA18675@kroah.com> <5453CD0D.9010206@users.sourceforge.net> <5463C10D.6020409@users.sourceforge.net> <5463C373.5050804@users.sourceforge.net> <20141112211438.GI6749@mwanda> <5463D62D.3010206@users.sourceforge.net> <20141112220540.GK5351@mwanda> In-Reply-To: <20141112220540.GK5351@mwanda> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: cocci@systeme.lip6.fr >>>> + goto cleanup1; >>> >>> 1) Don't use GW-BASIC label names. Label names should reflect what the >>> label does such as free_fuse_word or free_fuse_tabel. >>> >>> 2) Don't use do-nothing labels. Just return directly. >> >> Does the document "CodingStyle" need any extensions for special cases? > > I don't understand. Should the naming convention become more explicit for jump labels? > CodingStyle says: > > "If there is no cleanup needed then just return directly." Do you want that I send another update suggestion with other corrections for jump labels in the affected function implementation? Regards, Markus From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: elfring@users.sourceforge.net (SF Markus Elfring) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2014 09:50:32 +0100 Subject: [Cocci] [PATCH v2 2/2] staging: rtl8188eu: Better memory clean-up in efuse_phymap_to_logical() In-Reply-To: <20141112220540.GK5351@mwanda> References: <5317A59D.4@users.sourceforge.net> <544954FD.8040607@users.sourceforge.net> <20141029084702.GA18675@kroah.com> <5453CD0D.9010206@users.sourceforge.net> <5463C10D.6020409@users.sourceforge.net> <5463C373.5050804@users.sourceforge.net> <20141112211438.GI6749@mwanda> <5463D62D.3010206@users.sourceforge.net> <20141112220540.GK5351@mwanda> Message-ID: <546470D8.9050603@users.sourceforge.net> To: cocci@systeme.lip6.fr List-Id: cocci@systeme.lip6.fr >>>> + goto cleanup1; >>> >>> 1) Don't use GW-BASIC label names. Label names should reflect what the >>> label does such as free_fuse_word or free_fuse_tabel. >>> >>> 2) Don't use do-nothing labels. Just return directly. >> >> Does the document "CodingStyle" need any extensions for special cases? > > I don't understand. Should the naming convention become more explicit for jump labels? > CodingStyle says: > > "If there is no cleanup needed then just return directly." Do you want that I send another update suggestion with other corrections for jump labels in the affected function implementation? Regards, Markus