On Sun, Jul 17, 2016 at 08:51:39PM +0200, Julia Lawall wrote:
>
>
> On Sun, 17 Jul 2016, SF Markus Elfring wrote:
>
> > From: Markus Elfring <elfring@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Date: Sun, 17 Jul 2016 19:40:47 +0200
> >
> > Three variables will be set to an appropriate value a bit later.
> > Thus omit the explicit initialisation at the beginning.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Markus Elfring <elfring@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > drivers/staging/ks7010/ks7010_sdio.c | 8 ++++----
> > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/staging/ks7010/ks7010_sdio.c b/drivers/staging/ks7010/ks7010_sdio.c
> > index e06bc3c..3c62c57 100644
> > --- a/drivers/staging/ks7010/ks7010_sdio.c
> > +++ b/drivers/staging/ks7010/ks7010_sdio.c
> > @@ -323,14 +323,14 @@ static void tx_device_task(void *dev)
> > {
> > struct ks_wlan_private *priv = (struct ks_wlan_private *)dev;
> > struct tx_device_buffer *sp;
> > - int rc = 0;
> >
> > DPRINTK(4, "\n");
> > if (cnt_txqbody(priv) > 0
> > && atomic_read(&priv->psstatus.status) != PS_SNOOZE) {
> > sp = &priv->tx_dev.tx_dev_buff[priv->tx_dev.qhead];
> > if (priv->dev_state >= DEVICE_STATE_BOOT) {
> > - rc = write_to_device(priv, sp->sendp, sp->size);
> > + int rc = write_to_device(priv, sp->sendp, sp->size);
>
> This does not look appealing to me, neither the declaration in the middle
> of the function, nor the intiialization to the result of a complex
> expression, nor the separation of the call and the error checking code by
> a blank line. There is nothing wrong with having the rc variable be
> declared at the the top of the function, in its normal place.
+1
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
