>> A special view on software simplicity can also lead to questionable intermediate >> function implementation, can't it? > > I don't really follow. But in any case I do not see anything > questionable in the current tilcdc_convert_slave_node() implementation. I identified update candidates there like the following. 1. Delayed checking for null pointers … if (!slave || !of_device_is_available(lcdc)) … 2. Usage of a single jump label for (too many?) cases … goto out; … Can the corresponding exception handling become also a bit more efficient? >> Would you like to care a bit more for efficiency and software correctness >> around the discussed exception handling? > > No, I would not. Thanks for this information. I hope that the software situation can also be improved around this design aspect somehow. > For the moment I have more important tasks to do. I know also that various open issues are competing for your software development attention as usual. Regards, Markus -- 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
