On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 03:35:03PM +0200, SF Markus Elfring wrote:
> >>>>> if (atomic_read(&priv->sleepstatus.status) == 0) {
> >>>>> rw_data = GCR_B_DOZE;
> >>>>> - retval =
> >>>>> - ks7010_sdio_write(priv, GCR_B, &rw_data, sizeof(rw_data));
> >>>>> - if (retval) {
> >>>>> + if (ks7010_sdio_write(priv,
> >>>>> + GCR_B,
> >>>>> + &rw_data,
> >>>>> + sizeof(rw_data))) {
> >>>>
> >>>> A multi-line function call in an if test does not look nice at all. The
> >>>> original code was an easy-to-read expectable pattern.
> >>>
> >>> I agree. I am not strict on the 80 char limit, especially in cases like
> >>> the above.
>
> Will this line length limitation trigger any more collateral evolution
> in the discussed software module?
>
>
> >> Would you try an other source code formatting for the suggested change pattern?
> >
> > I don't understand the question?
>
> Can you follow expectations around the proposed refactoring of any
> function implementations?
I don't understand both questions. Maybe you need to give examples?
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
