[+cc Bjorn as he has strong code formatting preference in the PCI tree] Hi Max, > Use the proper macro instead of hard-coded (-1) value. > > Suggested-by: Krzysztof Wilczyński <kw@xxxxxxxxx> > Signed-off-by: Max Gurtovoy <mgurtovoy@xxxxxxxxxx> Thank you for taking care of this! Much appreciated! > --- > drivers/pci/pci-sysfs.c | 4 ++-- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/pci/pci-sysfs.c b/drivers/pci/pci-sysfs.c > index 7fb5cd17cc98..b21065222c87 100644 > --- a/drivers/pci/pci-sysfs.c > +++ b/drivers/pci/pci-sysfs.c > @@ -81,8 +81,8 @@ static ssize_t pci_dev_show_local_cpu(struct device *dev, bool list, > const struct cpumask *mask; > > #ifdef CONFIG_NUMA > - mask = (dev_to_node(dev) == -1) ? cpu_online_mask : > - cpumask_of_node(dev_to_node(dev)); > + mask = (dev_to_node(dev) == NUMA_NO_NODE) ? cpu_online_mask : > + cpumask_of_node(dev_to_node(dev)); Oh this somewhat awkward indentation we have with this ternary now, and so I wonder if either: mask = (dev_to_node(dev) == NUMA_NO_NODE) ? cpu_online_mask : cpumask_of_node(dev_to_node(dev)); Or, perhaps (yes, a few more lines): if (dev_to_node(dev) == NUMA_NO_NODE) mask = cpu_online_mask; else mask = cpumask_of_node(node); Would be easier on the eyes, so to speak. What do you think (not a problem if you don't want to change anything, thoguh)? Thank you! Reviewed-by: Krzysztof Wilczyński <kw@xxxxxxxxx> Krzysztof
