On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 12:21 PM, Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Mon, Jul 01, 2013 at 07:06:32PM +0900, Seung-Woo Kim wrote: >> If raw_edid is null, it will crash, so checking in bad label is >> meaningless. > > It would be an error on part of the caller, but the defense looks sane. > As the function is a bool, I would have preferred it returned > true/false, but your patch is correct wrt to the rest of the function. If we consider passing a NULL raw_edid here a caller-error, shouldn't this be a WARN on top? And I concur on the s/0/false/ bikeshed, return 0 could be misleading since for errno returning functions that reads as success. -Daniel -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation +41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
