On Thu, 2022-05-05 at 10:38 +0200, Niklas Schnelle wrote: > While determining the next PCI function is factored out of > pci_scan_slot() into next_fn() the former still handles the first > function as a special case. This duplicates the code from the scan loop. > > Furthermore the non ARI branch of next_fn() is generally hard to > understand and especially the check for multifunction devices is hidden > in the handling of NULL devices for non-contiguous multifunction. It > also signals that no further functions need to be scanned by returning > 0 via wraparound and this is a valid function number. > > Improve upon this by transforming the conditions in next_fn() to be > easier to understand. > > By changing next_fn() to return -ENODEV instead of 0 when there is no > next function we can then handle the initial function inside the loop > and deduplicate the shared handling. This also makes it more explicit > that only function 0 must exist. > > No functional change is intended. > > Cc: Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@xxxxxxxxxxx> > Signed-off-by: Niklas Schnelle <schnelle@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > --- Friendly ping :-)
