Re: [patch] [media] ngene: remove an unneeded condition

[walter harms <wharms@bfs.de>]

Am 28.04.2012 17:16, schrieb Dan Carpenter:
> On Sat, Apr 28, 2012 at 04:57:35PM +0200, walter harms wrote:
>>
>>
>> Am 20.04.2012 15:15, schrieb Dan Carpenter:
>>> "stat" is always zero here.  The condition used to be needed, but we
>>> shifted stuff around in 0f0b270f90 "[media] ngene: CXD2099AR Common
>>> Interface driver".
>>>
>>> This doesn't change how the code works, it's just a bit tidier.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/media/dvb/ngene/ngene-core.c b/drivers/media/dvb/ngene/ngene-core.c
>>> index f129a93..3985738 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/media/dvb/ngene/ngene-core.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/media/dvb/ngene/ngene-core.c
>>> @@ -1409,10 +1409,8 @@ static int ngene_start(struct ngene *dev)
>>>  	if (stat < 0)
>>>  		goto fail;
>>>  
>>> -	if (!stat)
>>> -		return stat;
>>> +	return 0;
>>>  
>>> -	/* otherwise error: fall through */
>>>  fail:
>>>  	ngwritel(0, NGENE_INT_ENABLE);
>>>  	free_irq(dev->pci_dev->irq, dev);
>>
>> it seems more logical to use the positive exit in this case like:
>>
>>   if (stat >=0)
>> 	return 0;
>>
>> instead of jumping over return 0:
>>
> 
> I would say it's more readable to handle the error condition as
> a special case instead of handling the normal success case as
> special.  It's better to be consistent instead of changing back and
> forth:
> 
> 	if (error condition)
> 		return ret;
> 	if (error condition)
> 		return ret;
> 	if (success conditi)
> 		return ret;
> 	if (error condition)
> 		return ret;
> 
> 

i agree but in this special case it looks strange. Would that more
readable ?

if (stat < 0)
{
<errorhandling here>	
 return stat;	
}
	
return 0:

re,
 wh