On Tue, Nov 08, 2022 at 04:12:17PM +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > On Mon, Nov 07, 2022 at 09:40:00AM +0530, Deepak R Varma wrote: > > Simplify code by using recommended min helper macro for logical > > evaluation and value assignment. This issue is identified by > > coccicheck using the minmax.cocci file. > > > > Signed-off-by: Deepak R Varma <drv@xxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > drivers/staging/iio/meter/ade7854-i2c.c | 2 +- > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/staging/iio/meter/ade7854-i2c.c b/drivers/staging/iio/meter/ade7854-i2c.c > > index a9a06e8dda51..a6ce7b24cc8f 100644 > > --- a/drivers/staging/iio/meter/ade7854-i2c.c > > +++ b/drivers/staging/iio/meter/ade7854-i2c.c > > @@ -61,7 +61,7 @@ static int ade7854_i2c_write_reg(struct device *dev, > > unlock: > > mutex_unlock(&st->buf_lock); > > > > - return ret < 0 ? ret : 0; > > + return min(ret, 0); > > As others have said, this isn't ok, and I hate ? : usage, so if you > want, spell that out please. Hello Greg, Just want to make sure I am getting it right: Are you suggesting me to resubmit the patch with revised patch description? Should I consider using the "if" based evaluation rather than using min() macro? Thank you, ./drv > > thanks, > > greg k-h >