From 241187c11818e5223c4bdfac79f28fdf63731733 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Eric Blake Date: Fri, 1 Dec 2017 17:24:31 -0600 Subject: [PATCH] tests: Avoid 'do/while(false); ' in vhost-user-bridge Use of a do/while(0) loop as a way to allow break statements in the middle of execute-once code is unusual. More typical is the use of goto for early exits, with a label at the end of the execute-once code, rather than nesting code in a scope; however, the comment at the end of the existing code makes this alternative a bit unpractical. So, to avoid false positives from a future syntax check about 'while (false);', and to keep the loop form (in case someone ever does add DONTWAIT support, where they can just as easily manipulate the initial loop condition or add an if around the final 'break'), I opted to use the form of a while(1) loop (the break as an early exit is more idiomatic there), coupled with a final break preserving the original comment. Signed-off-by: Eric Blake Message-Id: <20171201232433.25193-6-eblake@redhat.com> Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini --- tests/vhost-user-bridge.c | 6 ++++-- 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/tests/vhost-user-bridge.c b/tests/vhost-user-bridge.c index d820033a72..e0605a529e 100644 --- a/tests/vhost-user-bridge.c +++ b/tests/vhost-user-bridge.c @@ -283,7 +283,7 @@ vubr_backend_recv_cb(int sock, void *ctx) return; } - do { + while (1) { struct iovec *sg; ssize_t ret, total = 0; unsigned int num; @@ -343,7 +343,9 @@ vubr_backend_recv_cb(int sock, void *ctx) free(elem); elem = NULL; - } while (false); /* could loop if DONTWAIT worked? */ + + break; /* could loop if DONTWAIT worked? */ + } if (mhdr_cnt) { mhdr.num_buffers = i;