Re: [PATCH 1/2] Initial support for Allwinner's Security ID fuses

From: Oliver Schinagl
Date: Mon Jun 10 2013 - 17:43:37 EST

On 06/06/13 21:16, Andy Shevchenko wrote:

Thank you andy for your review, I do have a few questions/comments if you don't mind.
On Sun, Jun 2, 2013 at 5:58 PM, Oliver Schinagl <oliver+list@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
From: Oliver Schinagl <oliver@xxxxxxxxxxx>
+ if (likely((SID_SIZE))) {

Extra braces.
Use antipattern here.

While I accidentally dropped the pointer here, sorry for the confusion, what is antipattern? I have asked around and nobody really knew.

Wikipedia mentions it as a software development thing, but you make it sound like it is some sort of tool?

+ if (unlikely(!pdev->dev.of_node)) {
+ dev_err(dev, "No devicetree data available\n");
+ ret = -EFAULT;
+ goto exit;

Plain return here and in entire function where it applies.
Why? I know there's conflicting preferences here. The general consensus seems, don't return mid function if you don't absolutely have to. Yet, you make it sound, just return wherever. I take it that really is just a preference? I think i see both constructs throughout the kernel. So one review prefers the one method, the next the other?
+ ret = device_create_bin_file(dev, &sid_bin_attr);
+ if (unlikely(ret)) {

Any benifit of (un)likely in probe()?
Does it hurt however in any way though? It's just a compiler optimization isn't it.


With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko

Thank you for your time, it is much appreciated :)

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at