From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-pb0-f44.google.com (mail-pb0-f44.google.com [209.85.160.44]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A6EB66B0034 for ; Wed, 25 Sep 2013 13:58:32 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-pb0-f44.google.com with SMTP id xa7so11338pbc.17 for ; Wed, 25 Sep 2013 10:58:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pd0-f172.google.com with SMTP id z10so9254pdj.31 for ; Wed, 25 Sep 2013 10:58:29 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2013 10:58:27 -0700 (PDT) From: David Rientjes Subject: Re: [patch] mm, mempolicy: make mpol_to_str robust and always succeed In-Reply-To: <20130925032530.GA4771@redhat.com> Message-ID: References: <5215639D.1080202@asianux.com> <5227CF48.5080700@asianux.com> <20130925031127.GA4210@redhat.com> <20130925032530.GA4771@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Dave Jones , Andrew Morton , KOSAKI Motohiro , Chen Gang , Rik van Riel , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org On Tue, 24 Sep 2013, Dave Jones wrote: > > /* fall through */ > > > > for all of them would be pretty annoying. > > agreed, but with that example, it seems pretty obvious (to me at least) > that the lack of break's is intentional. Where it gets trickier to > make quick judgment calls is cases like the one I mentioned above, > where there are only a few cases, and there's real code involved in > some but not all cases. > I fully agree and have code in the oom killer that has the "fall through" comment if there's code in between the case statements, but I think things like case MPOL_BIND: case MPOL_INTERLEAVE: ... is quite easy to read. I don't feel strongly at all, though, so I'll just leave it to Andrew's preference. -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org