On 11 June 2015 at 20:51, Kalle Valo <kvalo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Michal Kazior <michal.kazior@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
>> This should help when analysing problems from
>> users and spot fw api blob problems easier.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Michal Kazior <michal.kazior@xxxxxxxxx>
>
> [...]
>
>> +static unsigned int ath10k_core_get_fw_feature_str(char *buf,
>> + size_t buf_len,
>> + enum ath10k_fw_features feat)
>> +{
>> + if (feat >= ARRAY_SIZE(ath10k_core_fw_feature_str) ||
>> + WARN_ON(!ath10k_core_fw_feature_str[feat])) {
>> + return scnprintf(buf, buf_len, "bit%d", feat);
>> + } else {
>> + return scnprintf(buf, buf_len, "%s",
>> + ath10k_core_fw_feature_str[feat]);
>> + }
>> +}
>
> I think the else is useless and did the change below in pending branch.
> Please review.
>
> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/core.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/core.c
> @@ -123,10 +123,9 @@ static unsigned int ath10k_core_get_fw_feature_str(char *buf,
> if (feat >= ARRAY_SIZE(ath10k_core_fw_feature_str) ||
> WARN_ON(!ath10k_core_fw_feature_str[feat])) {
> return scnprintf(buf, buf_len, "bit%d", feat);
> - } else {
> - return scnprintf(buf, buf_len, "%s",
> - ath10k_core_fw_feature_str[feat]);
> }
> +
> + return scnprintf(buf, buf_len, "%s", ath10k_core_fw_feature_str[feat]);
> }
>
> void ath10k_core_get_fw_features_str(struct ath10k *ar,
I think the "else" approach is a bit more easier on the eyes because
scnprintf() and format strings are aligned against each other.
I understand that you dropped "else" to adhere to `if (error) { handle error }`.
No strong opinions. Feel free to pick whatever suits you.
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
