Hi all, On 24 March 2016 at 11:28, Dan Carpenter <dan.carpen...@oracle.com> wrote: > On Thu, Mar 24, 2016 at 11:41:46AM +0100, Enric Balletbo i Serra wrote: >> + /* Map slave addresses of ANX7814 */ >> + for (i = 0; i < I2C_NUM_ADDRESSES; i++) { >> + anx78xx->i2c_dummy[i] = i2c_new_dummy(client->adapter, >> + anx78xx_i2c_addresses[i] >> 1); >> + if (!anx78xx->i2c_dummy[i]) { >> + DRM_ERROR("Failed to reserve i2c bus %02x.\n", >> + anx78xx_i2c_addresses[i]); > > Missing error code here. > >> + goto err_i2c; >> + } > > I'm, of course, not a fan of the naming. The name should be based on > what the goto location does... In this case it turns it off. Which is > slightly weird because we have not turned it on yet... I always say > that you should have multiple error labels and you only undo things > which have been done. > > Having a common exit path for the other functions where it was "goto out" > makes sense. But again in those cases I would prefer a meaningful label > name like "goto unlock;". In the kernel "goto out;" is meaningless, it > could do anything or everything or nothing. A lot of people like it > of course, but out: label code tends to be buggier than using a > meaningful name. > Dan, I'm so glad to see another like minded person on the topic. It seems that we're a minority though :-(
Enric, if you want to increase the chances of this getting reviewed I would humbly suggest adding a per-patch changelog (must), explicitly Cc (in the commit message) the people who commented on your patch (highly recommended), and perhaps cutting down the 20+ people from the To/Cc list (nitpicking). Another option would be to assist/review similar (drm bridge) patches for other contributors, who should return with the same :-) Just some suggestions (my 2c as they say), seeing that this has been around for a while. Regards, Emil _______________________________________________ devel mailing list de...@linuxdriverproject.org http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel