On 05/19/2015 03:17 PM, Michael Büsch wrote:
On Tue, 19 May 2015 08:05:56 -0400 (EDT)
Federico Simoncelli <fsimonce@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
diff --git a/drivers/media/dvb-frontends/lgs8gxx.c
b/drivers/media/dvb-frontends/lgs8gxx.c
index 3c92f36ea5c7..9b0166cdc7c2 100644
--- a/drivers/media/dvb-frontends/lgs8gxx.c
+++ b/drivers/media/dvb-frontends/lgs8gxx.c
@@ -544,11 +544,7 @@ static int lgs8gxx_set_mpeg_mode(struct lgs8gxx_state
*priv,
t |= clk_pol ? TS_CLK_INVERTED : TS_CLK_NORMAL;
t |= clk_gated ? TS_CLK_GATED : TS_CLK_FREERUN;
- ret = lgs8gxx_write_reg(priv, reg_addr, t);
- if (ret != 0)
- return ret;
-
- return 0;
+ return lgs8gxx_write_reg(priv, reg_addr, t);
}
Personally I prefer the current style because it's more consistent with all
the other calls in the same function (return ret when ret != 0).
It also allows you to easily add/remove calls without having to deal with
the last special case return my_last_fun_call(...).
Anyway it's not a big deal, I think it's your call.
I agree. I also prefer the current style for these reasons. The compiler will also generate the same code in both cases.
I don't think it really simplifies the code.
But if you really insist on doing this change, go for it. You get my ack for fc0011
I am also against that kind of simplifications. Even it reduces line or
two, it makes code more inconsistent, which means you have to make extra
thinking when reading that code. I prefer similar repeating patterns as
much as possible.
This is how I do it usually, even there is that extra last goto.
ret = write_reg();
if (ret)
goto err;
ret = write_reg();
if (ret)
goto err;
err:
return ret;
};
regards
Antti
--
http://palosaari.fi/
--
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
