On Sun, Dec 24, 2017 at 02:42:57PM +0100, Marcus Wolf wrote:
> > int rf69_set_dagc(struct spi_device *spi, enum dagc dagc)
> > {
> > switch (dagc) {
> > - case normalMode: return rf69_write_reg(spi, REG_TESTDAGC, DAGC_NORMAL);
> > - case improve: return rf69_write_reg(spi, REG_TESTDAGC, DAGC_IMPROVED_LOWBETA0);
> > - case improve4LowModulationIndex: return rf69_write_reg(spi, REG_TESTDAGC, DAGC_IMPROVED_LOWBETA1);
> > + case normalMode:
> > + return rf69_write_reg(spi, REG_TESTDAGC, DAGC_NORMAL);
> > + case improve:
> > + return rf69_write_reg(spi, REG_TESTDAGC, DAGC_IMPROVED_LOWBETA0);
> > + case improve4LowModulationIndex:
> > + return rf69_write_reg(spi, REG_TESTDAGC, DAGC_IMPROVED_LOWBETA1);
> > default:
> > dev_dbg(&spi->dev, "set: illegal input param");
> > return -EINVAL;
> >
>
> Hi Michael,
>
> first of all thank you for your effort :-)
>
> For me, the readability is reduced with this patch.
>
> But that's just my opinion/favour...
Would something like this be any better for these simple switch
statements?
int rf69_set_dagc(struct spi_device *spi, enum dagc dagc)
{
int dagc_value;
switch (dagc) {
case normalMode: dagc_value = DAGC_NORMAL;
case improve: dagc_value = DAGC_IMPROVED_LOWBETA0;
...
default:
dev_dbg(&spi->dev, "set: illegal input param");
return -EINVAL;
}
return rf69_write_reg(spi, REG_TESTDAGC, dagc_value);
}
--
Valentin
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
