Re: [PATCH] drivers: virtio: Use PTR_RET function

[Rusty Russell]

Andru Gheorghiu <gheorghiuandru@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
> PTR_RET does return. It's perfectly equivalent to using IS_ERR and the
> returning PTR_ERR. The implementation is here [1].

Um, I read the implementation, thanks.

> The reason for using it is this: if you have a function that does
> something why not call it instead of reproducing it's behavior by
> explicitly writing what it does.

Because clarity matters, and this function makes callers less clear.
It's the most breathtakingly bad name since BUILD_BUG_ON_ZERO().

Why not change PTR_ERR to return 0 if !IS_ERR()?  Noone breaks, gcc
probably produces the same code, and noone needs to learn your weird
new kernel meme.

In fact, as gcc will produce the same code for "if (PTR_ERR(p))" as it
does for "if (IS_ERR(p))", you get to be one of the very, very few
people who have ever *reduced* the complexity of a kernel interface.

Cheers,
Rusty.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/