Hi Lisa, On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 11:27 PM, Lisa Nguyen <lisa@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > 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]. > Please go ahead as per Laurent's suggestion. Thanks, --Prabhakar Lad -- 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
