On Mon, Nov 09, 2020 at 10:53:17PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > It's no difference in the functionality, but after the change the code > is less error prone to various checkers. > > Signed-off-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Reviewed-by: Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Re: [PATCH v5 02/17] gpiolib: add missed break statement
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
- Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 02/17] gpiolib: add missed break statement
- From: Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2020 17:18:37 +0200
- In-reply-to: <20201109205332.19592-3-andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
- Organization: Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - Westendinkatu 7, 02160 Espoo
- References: <20201109205332.19592-1-andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com> <20201109205332.19592-3-andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
- References:
- [PATCH v5 00/17] gpiolib: acpi: pin configuration fixes
- From: Andy Shevchenko
- [PATCH v5 02/17] gpiolib: add missed break statement
- From: Andy Shevchenko
- [PATCH v5 00/17] gpiolib: acpi: pin configuration fixes
- Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH v5 01/17] gpiolib: Replace unsigned by unsigned int
- Next by Date: Re: [PATCH v5 03/17] gpiolib: use proper API to pack pin configuration parameters
- Previous by thread: [PATCH v5 02/17] gpiolib: add missed break statement
- Next by thread: [PATCH v5 05/17] gpiolib: Extract gpio_set_config_with_argument() for future use
- Index(es):
 |