Hi Laurent, On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 8:50 AM, Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hi Lisa, > > Thank you for the patch. > > On Tuesday 10 December 2013 08:05:42 Lisa Nguyen wrote: >> Rewrite the return statement in vpfe_video.c to eliminate the >> use of a ternary operator. This will prevent the checkpatch.pl >> script from generating a warning saying to remove () from >> this particular return statement. >> >> Signed-off-by: Lisa Nguyen <lisa@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> --- >> Changes since v2: >> - Aligned -ETIMEDOUT return statement with if condition >> >> drivers/staging/media/davinci_vpfe/vpfe_video.c | 5 ++++- >> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/staging/media/davinci_vpfe/vpfe_video.c >> b/drivers/staging/media/davinci_vpfe/vpfe_video.c index 24d98a6..22e31d2 >> 100644 >> --- a/drivers/staging/media/davinci_vpfe/vpfe_video.c >> +++ b/drivers/staging/media/davinci_vpfe/vpfe_video.c >> @@ -346,7 +346,10 @@ static int vpfe_pipeline_disable(struct vpfe_pipeline >> *pipe) } >> mutex_unlock(&mdev->graph_mutex); >> >> - return (ret == 0) ? ret : -ETIMEDOUT ; >> + if (ret == 0) >> + return ret; >> + >> + return -ETIMEDOUT; > > I don't want to point the obvious, but what about just > > return ret ? -ETIMEDOUT : 0; > > or, if this is just about fixing the checkpatch.pl warning, > > return ret == 0 ? ret : -ETIMEDOUT; > > (I'd prefer the first) I understand your point :) I was making changes based on Prabhakar's feedback he gave me a while back[1]. Should I wait until he says? Lisa [1] http://www.mail-archive.com/linux-media@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/msg67833.html -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-media" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
