On Wed, Jun 07, 2023 at 10:30:05AM +0000, Trevor Wu (吳文良) wrote: > On Wed, 2023-06-07 at 12:41 +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote: > > Return -EINVAL on this error path instead of returning success. > > Hi Dan, > > I intended for the function to be reusable by both 2 and 4 amps, which > is why I added a condition in the middle. > This shouldn't be considered an error case, so there is no need to > return -EINVAL here. > Please kindly inform me if there are any errors in my understanding. Oh, it looked like an error path. Let me change it to "return 0;". regards, dan carpenter
