On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 09:12:39PM +0200, Frans Klaver wrote:
> In eeepc_rfkill_exit, we implement the same code four times. Pull out a
> function that cleans up an rfkill object to get rid of the duplication.
>
> Signed-off-by: Frans Klaver <fransklaver@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/platform/x86/eeepc-laptop.c | 34 ++++++++++++++--------------------
> 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/platform/x86/eeepc-laptop.c b/drivers/platform/x86/eeepc-laptop.c
> index e92ea41..73e8d39 100644
> --- a/drivers/platform/x86/eeepc-laptop.c
> +++ b/drivers/platform/x86/eeepc-laptop.c
> @@ -823,35 +823,29 @@ static char EEEPC_RFKILL_NODE_1[] = "\\_SB.PCI0.P0P5";
> static char EEEPC_RFKILL_NODE_2[] = "\\_SB.PCI0.P0P6";
> static char EEEPC_RFKILL_NODE_3[] = "\\_SB.PCI0.P0P7";
>
> +static inline void eeepc_destroy_rfkill(struct rfkill **rfkill)
> +{
> + if (!*rfkill)
> + return;
> + rfkill_unregister(*rfkill);
> + rfkill_destroy(*rfkill);
> + *rfkill = NULL;
> +}
In this case the savings is 6 lines at the cost of some legibility as double
pointers are arguably harder to read, and definitely easier to screw up ;-)
I appreciate the goal, but I'm not convinced it is worth it.
--
Darren Hart
Intel Open Source Technology Center
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe platform-driver-x86" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
