Re: [PATCH 2/2] 390/qeth: Refactoring for qeth_core_set_online()

From	Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com>
Newsgroups	linux.kernel
Subject	Re: [PATCH 2/2] 390/qeth: Refactoring for qeth_core_set_online()
Date	2016-01-04 15:10 +0100
Message-ID	<qNdZD-4ui-5@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References	<qEuGl-43C-5@gated-at.bofh.it> <qMNLQ-40q-9@gated-at.bofh.it> <qMNLQ-40q-17@gated-at.bofh.it> <qNbEu-2Rt-15@gated-at.bofh.it> <qNddg-3WR-21@gated-at.bofh.it>
Organization	linux.* mail to news gateway

Show all headers | View raw

On Mon, Jan 04, 2016 at 02:10:34PM +0100, SF Markus Elfring wrote:
> >> +++ b/drivers/s390/net/qeth_core_main.c
> >> @@ -5638,9 +5638,10 @@ static int qeth_core_set_online(struct ccwgroup_device *gdev)
> >>  {
> >>  	struct qeth_card *card = dev_get_drvdata(&gdev->dev);
> >>  	int rc;
> >> -	int def_discipline;
> >>  
> >>  	if (!card->discipline) {
> >> +		int def_discipline;
> >> +
> >>  		if (card->info.type == QETH_CARD_TYPE_IQD)
> >>  			def_discipline = QETH_DISCIPLINE_LAYER3;
> > 
> > Same here: I don't think we want to start with patches like this.
> 
> Thanks for your feedback.
> 
> 
> > This going to be a never ending story without much benefit.
> 
> Is the source code a bit clearer and safer if it will be expressed
> directly that the use of a specific variable is not intended for
> a complete function implementation but for the smaller scope
> of an if branch?

This depends on the function and what the author prefers. In this case the
function body is very small so I don't see any benefit at all.

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

Thread

[PATCH 0/2] 390/qeth: Fine-tuning for qeth_core_set_online() SF Markus Elfring <elfring@users.sourceforge.net> - 2016-01-03 11:10 +0100
  [PATCH 1/2] 390/qeth: Delete an unnecessary variable initialisation  in qeth_core_set_online() SF Markus Elfring <elfring@users.sourceforge.net> - 2016-01-03 11:10 +0100
    Re: [PATCH 1/2] 390/qeth: Delete an unnecessary variable  initialisation in qeth_core_set_online() Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com> - 2016-01-04 12:30 +0100
    Re: [PATCH 1/2] 390/qeth: Delete an unnecessary variable  initialisation in qeth_core_set_online() Ursula Braun <ubraun@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2016-01-07 15:40 +0100
      Re: 390/qeth: Delete an unnecessary variable initialisation in  qeth_core_set_online() SF Markus Elfring <elfring@users.sourceforge.net> - 2016-01-08 08:20 +0100
        Re: 390/qeth: Delete an unnecessary variable initialisation in  qeth_core_set_online() Ursula Braun <ubraun@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2016-01-08 09:30 +0100
          Re: 390/qeth: Delete an unnecessary variable initialisation in  qeth_core_set_online() SF Markus Elfring <elfring@users.sourceforge.net> - 2016-01-08 13:10 +0100
  [PATCH 2/2] 390/qeth: Refactoring for qeth_core_set_online() SF Markus Elfring <elfring@users.sourceforge.net> - 2016-01-03 11:10 +0100
    Re: [PATCH 2/2] 390/qeth: Refactoring for qeth_core_set_online() Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com> - 2016-01-04 12:40 +0100
      Re: [PATCH 2/2] 390/qeth: Refactoring for qeth_core_set_online() SF Markus Elfring <elfring@users.sourceforge.net> - 2016-01-04 14:20 +0100
        Re: [PATCH 2/2] 390/qeth: Refactoring for qeth_core_set_online() Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com> - 2016-01-04 15:10 +0100
          Re: 390/qeth: Refactoring for qeth_core_set_online() SF Markus Elfring <elfring@users.sourceforge.net> - 2016-01-04 15:20 +0100
            Re: 390/qeth: Refactoring for qeth_core_set_online() Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com> - 2016-01-05 09:00 +0100

csiph-web