>>>> i = virtpci_device_del(NULL /*no parent bus */, VIRTHBA_TYPE,
>>>> &scsi.wwnn, NULL);
>>>> - if (i) {
>>>> + if (i)
>>>> return 1;
>>>> - }
>>>> - return 0;
>>>> + else
>>>> + return 0;
>>> No, now this will introduce a new checkpatch warning that "else is not
>>> required after return". why did you introduce this "else"?
>> I did this so that the code is more readable and understandable, I checked and
>> checkpatch didn't call this out , so its clean.
>>
>> Otherwise the above code looks like this
>>
>> if(i)
>> return 1;
>> return 0;
>
> That looks fine.
>
> I haven't looked at the code in detail. Is it normal that the return
> values seem to be 0 1 and -1? Which values represent success and which
> represent an error? It is nicer to have the errors under if and success
> as a direct return at the end.
Here in this driver directory, return 1 means SUCCESS and return 0 means FAILURE
So you mean my code change is fine?
>
> julia
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-janitors" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
