On Wed, Feb 15, 2023 at 01:17:33PM +0100, Stefano Brivio wrote:
> Nit:
> 
> On Fri, 27 Jan 2023 16:11:09 +1100
> David Gibson <david@gibson.dropbear.id.au> wrote:
> 
> > This goto can be handled just as simply and more clearly with a do while.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: David Gibson <david@gibson.dropbear.id.au>
> > ---
> >  tcp.c | 11 +++++------
> >  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/tcp.c b/tcp.c
> > index f0085e3..f7228d1 100644
> > --- a/tcp.c
> > +++ b/tcp.c
> > @@ -2158,13 +2158,12 @@ static int tcp_data_from_sock(struct ctx *c, struct tcp_tap_conn *conn)
> >  		iov_sock[fill_bufs].iov_len = iov_rem;
> >  
> >  	/* Receive into buffers, don't dequeue until acknowledged by guest. */
> > -recvmsg:
> > -	len = recvmsg(s, &mh_sock, MSG_PEEK);
> > -	if (len < 0) {
> > -		if (errno == EINTR)
> > -			goto recvmsg;
> > +	do {
> > +		len = recvmsg(s, &mh_sock, MSG_PEEK);
> > +	} while (len < 0 && errno == EINTR);
> 
> For consistency, we shouldn't use curly brackets if there's a single
> line in the loop body (only other occurrence: pasta_wait_for_ns()).

Huh... I never even knew the braces were optional for do while.

> I don't have a strong preference here and I can also fix it up on
> merge, by the way.
> 

-- 
David Gibson			| I'll have my music baroque, and my code
david AT gibson.dropbear.id.au	| minimalist, thank you.  NOT _the_ _other_
				| _way_ _around_!
http://www.ozlabs.org/~dgibson