Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v8 1/2] hypervisor: XENMEM_claim_pages (subop of existing) hypercall

[Keir Fraser <keir@xxxxxxx>]

On 29/11/2012 08:07, "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

>>>> On 28.11.12 at 19:05, Dan Magenheimer <dan.magenheimer@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>  From: Jan Beulich [mailto:JBeulich@xxxxxxxx]
>>> Perhaps then even invert the if()
>>> condition and have just a single return point.
>> 
>> Rather than invert the if(), unless you prefer the extra
>> level of indentation, I'd prefer:
>> 
>> +    d->tot_pages += pages;
>> +    if ( !d->unclaimed_pages )
>> +        goto out;
>>    <snip>
>> +out:
>> +    return d->tot_pages;
>> 
>> Would that be acceptable?
> 
> Acceptable as per the coding guidelines - yes. But I personally
> dislike goto-s (and would hence prefer the extra level of
> indentation, considering that this is a strait code block with no
> deep nesting of inner scopes).

Personally I think I prefer the bailing goto, as I like straightline code
with no indentation where possible. But it is personal preference for a
function this short. Either is perfectly acceptable.

 -- Keir

> Jan
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Xen-devel mailing list
> Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel



_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel