From: Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu>
To: Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Cc: Austin Kim <austindh.kim@gmail.com>,
<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-usb@vger.kernel.org>,
<mathias.nyman@linux.intel.com>, <Thinh.Nguyen@synopsys.com>,
<nsaenzjulienne@suse.de>, <jflat@chromium.org>,
<malat@debian.org>, <dianders@chromium.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] usb: hub: Minor refactoring in usb_hub_init()
Date: Mon, 23 Sep 2019 10:58:50 -0400 (EDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44L0.1909231053500.24712-100000@netrider.rowland.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190923071145.GB2746429@kroah.com>
On Mon, 23 Sep 2019, Greg KH wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 23, 2019 at 03:19:21PM +0900, Austin Kim wrote:
> > Normally when creation of workqueue fails, exception handling takes place
> > after the call to alloc_workqueue() is made.
> >
> > But looking into usb_hub_init() function, 'return 0' statement is executed,
> > when alloc_workqueue() returns valid workqueue pointer.
> > if (hub_wq)
> > return 0;
> >
> > This might make other Linux driver developers get confused
> > because they could deduce that this is exceptional handling routine.
> >
> > So perform minor refactoring by adding NULL pointer dereference check
> > routine right after the call to alloc_workqueue() is made.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Austin Kim <austindh.kim@gmail.com>
> > ---
> > drivers/usb/core/hub.c | 7 +++++--
> > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/usb/core/hub.c b/drivers/usb/core/hub.c
> > index e8ebacc..0ddbfe6 100644
> > --- a/drivers/usb/core/hub.c
> > +++ b/drivers/usb/core/hub.c
> > @@ -5530,9 +5530,12 @@ int usb_hub_init(void)
> > * over to the companion full-speed controller.
> > */
> > hub_wq = alloc_workqueue("usb_hub_wq", WQ_FREEZABLE, 0);
> > - if (hub_wq)
> > - return 0;
> > + if (unlikely(!hub_wq))
>
> Only ever use likely/unlikely if you can measure the difference without
> it. Otherwise the compiler and cpu will almost always do this better
> than you.
>
> So please remove this.
>
> > + goto err_workqueue;
> > +
> > + return 0;
> >
> > +err_workqueue:
> > /* Fall through if kernel_thread failed */
>
> This comment is now incorrect.
>
> But really, there is nothing wrong with the original code here. It
> works properly, and while it is not identical to normal code "style"
> here, there's nothing wrong with it that I can see.
Indeed. In fact, I suspect that this change would make the code less
understandable, because the reader would wonder why anybody would go to
the trouble of jumping over a return statement. After all, this:
if (!test)
jump error;
return 0;
error:
just looks like a strange and inefficient way of writing:
if (test)
return 0;
Anyone reading it would wonder what the original author was thinking.
If you really want to fix up this subroutine, you could change the two
"return -1" statements. They should return an appropriate error code,
not just -1.
Alan Stern
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-09-23 14:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-09-23 6:19 [PATCH] usb: hub: Minor refactoring in usb_hub_init() Austin Kim
2019-09-23 7:11 ` Greg KH
2019-09-23 14:58 ` Alan Stern [this message]
2019-09-25 10:10 ` Austin Kim
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=Pine.LNX.4.44L0.1909231053500.24712-100000@netrider.rowland.org \
--to=stern@rowland.harvard.edu \
--cc=Thinh.Nguyen@synopsys.com \
--cc=austindh.kim@gmail.com \
--cc=dianders@chromium.org \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=jflat@chromium.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-usb@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=malat@debian.org \
--cc=mathias.nyman@linux.intel.com \
--cc=nsaenzjulienne@suse.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).