On 4/8/25 00:16, Ritesh Harjani (IBM) wrote:
Zorro Lang <zlang@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
On Fri, Apr 04, 2025 at 10:34:47AM +0530, Ritesh Harjani wrote:
"Nirjhar Roy (IBM)" <nirjhar.roy.lists@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
Replace exit <return-val> with _exit <return-val> which
is introduced in the previous patch.
Signed-off-by: Nirjhar Roy (IBM) <nirjhar.roy.lists@xxxxxxxxx>
<...>
---
@@ -225,7 +225,7 @@ _filter_bmap()
die_now()
{
status=1
- exit
+ _exit
Why not remove status=1 too and just do _exit 1 here too?
Like how we have done at other places?
Yeah, nice catch! As the defination of _exit:
_exit()
{
status="$1"
exit "$status"
}
The
"
status=1
exit
"
should be equal to:
"
_exit 1
"
And "_exit" looks not make sense, due to it gives null to status.
Same problem likes below:
@@ -3776,7 +3773,7 @@ _get_os_name()
echo 'linux'
else
echo Unknown operating system: `uname`
- exit
+ _exit
The "_exit" without argument looks not make sense.
That's right. _exit called with no argument could make status as null.
Yes, that is correct.
To prevent such misuse in future, should we add a warning/echo message
Yeah, the other thing that we can do is 'status=${1:-0}'. In that case,
for cases where the return value is a success, we simply use "_exit".
Which one do you think adds more value and flexibility to the usage?
--NR
if the no. of arguments passed to _exit() is not 1?
-ritesh
--
Nirjhar Roy
Linux Kernel Developer
IBM, Bangalore
