Re: [PATCH 16/21] spi: s3c64xx: add missing blank line after declaration

[Sam Protsenko <semen.protsenko@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Wed, Jan 24, 2024 at 3:54 AM Tudor Ambarus <tudor.ambarus@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 1/23/24 19:28, Sam Protsenko wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 23, 2024 at 9:34 AM Tudor Ambarus <tudor.ambarus@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>
> >> Add missing blank line after declaration. Move initialization in the
> >> body of the function.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Tudor Ambarus <tudor.ambarus@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >> ---
> >>  drivers/spi/spi-s3c64xx.c | 3 ++-
> >>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/drivers/spi/spi-s3c64xx.c b/drivers/spi/spi-s3c64xx.c
> >> index f5474f3b3920..2abf5994080a 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/spi/spi-s3c64xx.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/spi/spi-s3c64xx.c
> >> @@ -1273,8 +1273,9 @@ static int s3c64xx_spi_suspend(struct device *dev)
> >>  {
> >>         struct spi_controller *host = dev_get_drvdata(dev);
> >>         struct s3c64xx_spi_driver_data *sdd = spi_controller_get_devdata(host);
> >> +       int ret;
> >>
> >> -       int ret = spi_controller_suspend(host);
> >> +       ret = spi_controller_suspend(host);
> >
> > Why not just moving the empty line below the declaration block,
> > keeping the initialization on the variable declaration line?
> >
>
> just a matter of personal preference. I find it ugly to do an
> initialization at variable declaration and then to immediately check the
> return value in the body of the function. But I'll do as you say, just
> cosmetics anyway.

That's not like "do as I say", I'm just a mere reviewer anyway, so
it's just my opinion :) You can leave it as is, and I kinda can see
your point now (having actual logical operation executed in main body
rather than in initialization list):

Reviewed-by: Sam Protsenko <semen.protsenko@xxxxxxxxxx>