On 4/15/20 3:48 PM, Mathieu Poirier wrote:
> Improve the readability of function rproc_alloc_firmware() by using
> a non-negated condition.
>
> Suggested-by: Alex Elder <elder@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@xxxxxxxxxx>
If it were me, I'd move the comment above the if statement and
perhaps reword it a little bit to describe what's happening.
But no matter, this looks good.
Reviewed-by: Alex Elder <elder@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c | 6 +++---
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
> index ebaff496ef81..0bfa6998705d 100644
> --- a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
> +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
> @@ -1984,14 +1984,14 @@ static int rproc_alloc_firmware(struct rproc *rproc,
> {
> const char *p;
>
> - if (!firmware)
> + if (firmware)
> + p = kstrdup_const(firmware, GFP_KERNEL);
> + else
> /*
> * If the caller didn't pass in a firmware name then
> * construct a default name.
> */
> p = kasprintf(GFP_KERNEL, "rproc-%s-fw", name);
> - else
> - p = kstrdup_const(firmware, GFP_KERNEL);
>
> if (!p)
> return -ENOMEM;
>
