Re: [PATCH v4 6/6] iio:bmi160: use if (ret) instead of if (ret < 0)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 6/6] iio:bmi160: use if (ret) instead of if (ret < 0)
From: Fabio Estevam <festevam@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 2 Feb 2019 21:12:22 -0200
Cc: linux-iio@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Jonathan Cameron <jic23@xxxxxxxxxx>, Hartmut Knaack <knaack.h@xxxxxx>, Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@xxxxxxxxxx>, Peter Meerwald-Stadler <pmeerw@xxxxxxxxxx>, Rob Herring <robh+dt@xxxxxxxxxx>, Daniel Baluta <daniel.baluta@xxxxxxxxx>, "open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS" <devicetree@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <20190202215601.20275-7-martin@martingkelly.com>
References: <20190202215601.20275-1-martin@martingkelly.com> <20190202215601.20275-7-martin@martingkelly.com>

On Sat, Feb 2, 2019 at 7:59 PM Martin Kelly <martin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> From: Martin Kelly <martin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> We are using "if (ret < 0)" in many places in which the function returns 0
> on success. Use "if (ret)" instead for better clarity and correctness.

What's wrong with "if (ret < 0)" ?

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [PATCH v4 6/6] iio:bmi160: use if (ret) instead of if (ret < 0)
  - From: Martin Kelly

References:
- [PATCH v4 0/6] iio:bmi160: add drdy interrupt support
  - From: Martin Kelly
- [PATCH v4 6/6] iio:bmi160: use if (ret) instead of if (ret < 0)
  - From: Martin Kelly

Prev by Date: [PATCH v4 6/6] iio:bmi160: use if (ret) instead of if (ret < 0)
Next by Date: Re: [PATCH v4 6/6] iio:bmi160: use if (ret) instead of if (ret < 0)
Previous by thread: [PATCH v4 6/6] iio:bmi160: use if (ret) instead of if (ret < 0)
Next by thread: Re: [PATCH v4 6/6] iio:bmi160: use if (ret) instead of if (ret < 0)
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

[Index of Archives] [Linux USB Devel] [Video for Linux] [Linux Audio Users] [Yosemite News] [Linux Input] [Linux Kernel] [Linux SCSI] [X.org]

Powered by Linux