[PATCH v2 1/4] i2c: testunit: sort case blocks

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Because a 'fallthrough' was refactored away, the order of 'case'
statements can be sorted better now to ease understanding the flow of
events.

Signed-off-by: Wolfram Sang <wsa+renesas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
 drivers/i2c/i2c-slave-testunit.c | 16 ++++++++--------
 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/i2c/i2c-slave-testunit.c b/drivers/i2c/i2c-slave-testunit.c
index 4c550306f3ec..be1d2e900aef 100644
--- a/drivers/i2c/i2c-slave-testunit.c
+++ b/drivers/i2c/i2c-slave-testunit.c
@@ -94,6 +94,14 @@ static int i2c_slave_testunit_slave_cb(struct i2c_client *client,
 	int ret = 0;
 
 	switch (event) {
+	case I2C_SLAVE_WRITE_REQUESTED:
+		if (test_bit(TU_FLAG_IN_PROCESS, &tu->flags))
+			return -EBUSY;
+
+		memset(tu->regs, 0, TU_NUM_REGS);
+		tu->reg_idx = 0;
+		break;
+
 	case I2C_SLAVE_WRITE_RECEIVED:
 		if (test_bit(TU_FLAG_IN_PROCESS, &tu->flags))
 			return -EBUSY;
@@ -127,14 +135,6 @@ static int i2c_slave_testunit_slave_cb(struct i2c_client *client,
 		tu->reg_idx = 0;
 		break;
 
-	case I2C_SLAVE_WRITE_REQUESTED:
-		if (test_bit(TU_FLAG_IN_PROCESS, &tu->flags))
-			return -EBUSY;
-
-		memset(tu->regs, 0, TU_NUM_REGS);
-		tu->reg_idx = 0;
-		break;
-
 	case I2C_SLAVE_READ_PROCESSED:
 		if (is_proc_call && tu->regs[TU_REG_DATAH])
 			tu->regs[TU_REG_DATAH]--;
-- 
2.43.0





[Index of Archives]     [Linux Samsung SOC]     [Linux Wireless]     [Linux Kernel]     [ATH6KL]     [Linux Bluetooth]     [Linux Netdev]     [Kernel Newbies]     [IDE]     [Security]     [Git]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux ATA RAID]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]

  Powered by Linux