3 ms·

The diff from the patch: - goto discard; + consume_skb(skb); + return 0; One of the rare cases in the wild where a goto really was considered harmful! ;

• sidarape 10y ago
  Tbf, the return acts like a goto.
• deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
• IshKebab 10y ago
  Rare? What about goto fail?
  • sp332 10y ago
    That was 3 years ago. And kernel code is covered in gotos.
  • sebcat 10y ago
    in 'goto fail', the problem looked like: if (foo() != 0) goto fail; goto fail; That extra line of code could just as likely have been a return statement or anything else. The problem was not with the goto statement itself. Edited to add: 'goto fail' is a valid construct and can be used to handle finalization in C functions. Consider: int foo(char *bar, int baz) { sometype_t *obj = NULL; int fd = -1; if ((obj = sometype_new(bar, baz)) == NULL) { goto fail; } if ((fd = open(sometype_path(obj), O_RDONLY)) < 0) { goto fail; } /* ... */ return 0; fail: if (fd < 0) { close(fd); } if (obj != NULL) { sometype_free(obj); } return -1; } There's nothing inherently wrong about that.
    • Normal_gaussian 10y ago
      It is often much clearer to use goto than using a wrapper and switching on enum'ed return value to destruct a failed transaction.
  • jlgaddis 10y ago
    "rare", not "non-existent". "goto fail", while well-known, is only one occurrence.