On Mon, 2022-09-26 at 13:43 +0300, Jani Nikula wrote: > On Mon, 26 Sep 2022, Luca Coelho <luca@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Mon, 2022-09-12 at 14:18 +0300, Ville Syrjala wrote: > > > From: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > No need for the 'procmon' variable here. Just return the correct > > > thing from the switch statement directly. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > --- > > > > This doesn't make any difference in practice, the compiler will very > > likely optimize out the procmon variable. > > > > In general, I think I think it's preferable to avoid this kind of > > patches, because they just make git blame a bit harder to interpret. > > I think it's nicer to read, ymmv. Okay, barely. And that's why I commented, I think the churn may not be worth the tiny increase in readability. Anyway, I'm not a maintainer here, so feel free to dismiss my minor comments. > > Nevertheless, this is certainly not a reason to nack, so: > > > > Reviewed-by: Luca Coelho <luciano.coelho@xxxxxxxxx> > > N.b. I've already reviewed patches 1-13. [1] Oh, I missed that and thought you had only reviewed 6 and 13. Sorry, I'll stop now. 🙂 -- Cheers, Luca.
