On 12 March 2015 at 16:49, Nicholas Mc Guire <hofrat@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Return type of wait_for_completion_timeout is unsigned long not int. > An appropriately named unsigned long is added and the assignments fixed up. > Rather than returning 0 (timeout) or a more or less random remaining time > (completion success) this return 0 or 1 which also resolves the type of the > functions being int. > > Signed-off-by: Nicholas Mc Guire <hofrat@xxxxxxxxx> > --- > > Checking the call-sites of ath10k_wmi_wait_for_unified_ready and > ath10k_wmi_wait_for_service_ready the positive return value (remaining > time in jiffies) is never passed up the call-chain nor used so it is > cleaner to treat this like a boolean success/fail only (actually the two > functions should probably be of type bool - but that does not seem to be > common practice in the ath10k code base) It'd make sense to have these functions return 0 or -ETIMEDOUT. In that case both call sites would need to be adjusted to treat "< 0" or "!x" as an error (instead of the current "<= 0") condition and not set -ETIMEDOUT themselves. Michał -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
