This needs some heavy checking... (line 1029)

You can link directly to a line by appending #&lt;line_number&gt;<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;torvalds&#x2F;linux&#x2F;blob&#x2F;f4bc5bbb5fef3cf421ba3485d6d383c27ec473ed&#x2F;kernel&#x2F;sys.c#L1029" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;torvalds&#x2F;linux&#x2F;blob&#x2F;f4bc5bbb5fef3cf421ba3...</a>

I spied a goto. Ctrl&#x2F;Command+F spies 60 gotos. CS students: point to the Linux source code if your professor ever gives you grief about gotos.

I find it mildly entertaining to casually browse random 17-year-old code lying at the heart of the Linux kernel and encounter gems like this.

As someone who has done some OS development and sysadmin work, I can relate to that quote. The 1st edition of Unix is over 50 years old and some of the legacy cruft that has accumulated since is so sedimented I swear it&#x27;s going to turn into oil any minute now.

<p><pre><code> &#x2F;* * Samma på svenska.. *&#x2F;</code></pre>

A meta comment on the comments on this article: as one might expect post-&quot;goto fail&quot;[1] there are a lot of people saying &quot;hey this should be refactored, no goto!&quot; I thought that at first when looking at the code, given what I remember of the Apple SSL vulnerability, and how &quot;goto&quot; has a smell. But, as it turns out, there are sane reasons to use goto in systems programming, especially as a kind of cleanup &#x2F; finally block. TIL.<p>[1] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=7282005" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=7282005</a>

In a modern codebase, would there be tests for code like this? Is it too late for a plucky contributor to start adding them?

I guess it&#x27;s too scary to touch, but I feel like such code could be refactored to not use goto, amongst other issues.