On 2011-02-22 23:06, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> * Yannick Brosseau ([email protected]) wrote:
>   
>> Signed-off-by: Yannick Brosseau <[email protected]>
>> ---
>>  libust/buffers.c |    9 ++++-----
>>  1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/libust/buffers.c b/libust/buffers.c
>> index 4e8004c..534d0ef 100644
>> --- a/libust/buffers.c
>> +++ b/libust/buffers.c
>> @@ -319,12 +319,11 @@ static int open_channel(struct ust_channel *chan, 
>> size_t subbuf_size,
>>  
>>      return 0;
>>  
>> -    /* Jump directly inside the loop to close the buffers that were already
>> -     * opened. */
>> -    for(; i>=0; i--) {
>> -            close_buf(chan->buf[i]);
>>  error:
>> -            do {} while(0);
>> +    /* Loop through the opened buffers and close them. Skip the current i, 
>> +       since it's the one that did not open. */
>> +    for(i--; i>=0; i--) {
>> +            close_buf(chan->buf[i]);
>>     
> Not sure I see how this is more readable. You seem to be changing the
> code behavior too.
>   

At least we don't have a jump un the middle of a loop and a complex nop
operation.
The behavior is the same.

We could also not reuse the i and loop from 0 to i-1.

_______________________________________________
ltt-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.casi.polymtl.ca/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ltt-dev

Reply via email to