On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 02:51:45AM -0700, Lisa Nguyen wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 2:01 AM, Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 29, 2013 at 10:06:34PM -0700, Lisa Nguyen wrote:
> >> --- a/drivers/staging/bcm/Bcmchar.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/staging/bcm/Bcmchar.c
> >> @@ -287,9 +287,9 @@ static long bcm_char_ioctl(struct file *filp, UINT cmd, ULONG arg)
> >> struct bcm_rdm_buffer sRdmBuffer = {0};
> >> PCHAR temp_buff = NULL;
> >> UINT uiTempVar = 0;
> >> - if ((Adapter->IdleMode == TRUE) ||
> >> - (Adapter->bShutStatus == TRUE) ||
> >> - (Adapter->bPreparingForLowPowerMode == TRUE)) {
> >> + if ((Adapter->IdleMode == true) ||
> >> + (Adapter->bShutStatus == true) ||
> >> + (Adapter->bPreparingForLowPowerMode == true)) {
> >
> > Your patch is fine but these variable names suck. How is "Mode" or
> > "Status" true or false? It should be something like:
> >
> > if (adapter->idle || adapter->shutdown ||
> > addapter->preparing_for_low_power) {
> >
> > (I assume that's what the code is trying to say).
>
> A big chunk of the bcm driver code is ugly to begin with.
>
> I was focused on cleaning up pointless typedefs before attempting to
> rewrite the conditionals as they are an eyesore. I haven't read too
> much into the code yet.
>
Yes. Yes. I understand. These are just bonus comments I throw out for
free. They don't require a response.
regards,
dan carpenter
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
