Am 09.01.2018 um 21:04 schrieb Valentin Vidic:
> 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);
> }
>
Hi Valentin,
I'd like such code very much. Marcin Ciupak already made such a proposal
but most probably the mainline changed to fast so he couldn't place his
patch...
If you would like to refactor the rf69.c in that way, I would be very happy.
Hope others will like this, too.
Thanks,
Marcus
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
