archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [RFC] single return paradigm
@ 2003-07-26 22:16 Samuel Thibault
  2003-07-27 10:43 ` Alan Cox
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Samuel Thibault @ 2003-07-26 22:16 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: linux-kernel


The "single return" paradigm of drivers/char/vt.c:tioclinux() surprised
me at first glance. But I'm now trying to maintain a patch which adds
probes at entry and exit of functions for performance instrumenting, and
this paradigm is a great help, and on the other hand, maintaining the
patch for drivers/scsi/sg/sg_ioctl() is really a drudgery whenever a
little thing changes or a case is added... I don't know what people from
the linux trace toolkit think of this?

Gcc compiles every function into "one return form" anyway, so there's no
penalty in defining a retval variable, having it assigned, and doing a
break or goto out. I has been said to be of religious concern, but
having this habit keeps tracing patches simple. And if one needs, say, a
spinlock at entry & exit, the work is almost done. One could still have
a second exit for error cases, but no more.

Could this be added to CodingStyle or something?

Samuel Thibault

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2003-08-17  1:10 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2003-07-26 22:16 [RFC] single return paradigm Samuel Thibault
2003-07-27 10:43 ` Alan Cox
2003-07-30  1:02   ` Samuel Thibault
2003-08-17  1:10   ` Richard Henderson

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).