On Friday 28 September 2007, Grant Likely wrote:
> -       ret = uart_register_driver(&ulite_uart_driver);
> -       if (ret)
> -               return ret;
> +       pr_debug("uartlite: calling uart_register_driver()\n");
> +       if ((ret = uart_register_driver(&ulite_uart_driver)) != 0)
> +               goto err_uart;
>  
> -       ret = platform_driver_register(&ulite_platform_driver);
> -       if (ret)
> -               uart_unregister_driver(&ulite_uart_driver);
> +       if ((ret = ulite_of_register()) != 0)
> +               goto err_of;
>  
> +       pr_debug("uartlite: calling platform_driver_register()\n");
> +       if ((ret = platform_driver_register(&ulite_platform_driver)) != 0)
> +               goto err_plat;
> +
> +       return 0;

I don't see this as much of an improvement. Doing an assignment in the
condition makes the code less readable IMHO, so it should really
be written as

        ret = try_something();
        if (ret)
                goto something_failed;

This keeps the normal code to the left, and the error handling indented
to the right.


        Arnd <><
_______________________________________________
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org
https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev

Reply via email to