From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_MED,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS, URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 052CFC282D7 for ; Sun, 3 Feb 2019 00:30:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BC35720870 for ; Sun, 3 Feb 2019 00:30:47 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=martingkelly-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com header.i=@martingkelly-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com header.b="OdMXId4r" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727104AbfBCAar (ORCPT ); Sat, 2 Feb 2019 19:30:47 -0500 Received: from mail-pl1-f195.google.com ([209.85.214.195]:34401 "EHLO mail-pl1-f195.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727089AbfBCAaq (ORCPT ); Sat, 2 Feb 2019 19:30:46 -0500 Received: by mail-pl1-f195.google.com with SMTP id w4so5117041plz.1 for ; Sat, 02 Feb 2019 16:30:46 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=martingkelly-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=qcUn+mGlHwk43YTFNIzD6HyXrckX3EkUGidVCRh44mQ=; b=OdMXId4rxzTXJjd/dWpjk+i5wo9t68Jaab2euMhTyghGGFLaA2IQzdlWRC3eziE9ya PQ188HxPdXLuks+WBXpG58eLS9SdW1WB7e6X6GoJ/nt0wH8BFBvXemz0PFZJrOmdu6bW uzteKrFDOGEsKiJ0bzTxiJ5emqKw1ISdczW6FCkARkSUJ47hi+i/7TUOS8HLFft2eQ05 JbNhyewybLa010GE/rSK4QMP3xNeRz/EsDreqyH86rew659mhFXr4I8fgC9kITfChPxS YwhSCIVd9HxwO/ccULK+3GZiGuB/+oPfhA4UvQ0d9vFfKZjsVnf+GRr8ADzzXFIk2tRN E3qQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=qcUn+mGlHwk43YTFNIzD6HyXrckX3EkUGidVCRh44mQ=; b=MzEAKwMwfTUcBvQpFpKYx26tm0VjdbLh3LcCyVltmLICXL6LWpCOKHlZtika/KTx3c 0ZlDQP8fRiC2X/vuTJVd1tk0tEuvhvsVfbNZDCe4nW3vc7UJrNmI2f6YoP9Z3yB12f46 zIX079U3rvlsjgMVcX96/9fvkFBVS7DRQpvKscKhECK6KW11aZfX3Hhz+zObMoKKy+aE b8988gGzOmsOVMwOq9u0TpVYp95pg/iO176S/m0i5Jgzc6Xjxw9Fgpffj4IVEL6Jjx8d B/G91Fe0eeORkyL6BApGQXOQe0aZMxnaXoVJMWTpXVpRX+hNHiyPPHTI5Pdw5JZa+V3p nGJQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AHQUAuZjO50OQ8m5PQUxpktxmHIyWJjE/mCk1DJW0hcfi1UWR5RZS6Zj AG4rcsBcpqcKPsQDEq1a5IIbjg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AHgI3IbAn/WJk1N9wGkKtTfmmfbAZLrbQC/TqJNISF1nUnHqAzjCha59Vzib9UJPGk17mWYB+qOktA== X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:6949:: with SMTP id k9mr2837909plt.85.1549153845965; Sat, 02 Feb 2019 16:30:45 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.0.8] (174-21-177-9.tukw.qwest.net. [174.21.177.9]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id w88sm20650737pfk.11.2019.02.02.16.30.44 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Sat, 02 Feb 2019 16:30:44 -0800 (PST) Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 6/6] iio:bmi160: use if (ret) instead of if (ret < 0) To: Fabio Estevam Cc: linux-iio@vger.kernel.org, Jonathan Cameron , Hartmut Knaack , Lars-Peter Clausen , Peter Meerwald-Stadler , Rob Herring , Daniel Baluta , "open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS" References: <20190202215601.20275-1-martin@martingkelly.com> <20190202215601.20275-7-martin@martingkelly.com> From: Martin Kelly Message-ID: Date: Sat, 2 Feb 2019 16:30:44 -0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-iio-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-iio@vger.kernel.org On 2/2/19 3:12 PM, Fabio Estevam wrote: > On Sat, Feb 2, 2019 at 7:59 PM Martin Kelly wrote: >> >> From: Martin Kelly >> >> We are using "if (ret < 0)" in many places in which the function returns 0 >> on success. Use "if (ret)" instead for better clarity and correctness. > > What's wrong with "if (ret < 0)" ? > Jonathan Cameron pointed out that the check is for functions that return 0 on success. Thus, the check should be either "if (ret != 0)" or "if (ret)". Jonathan prefers "if (ret)", so I'm using that. By leaving it at "if (ret < 0)", technically a function could return positive numbers and not count as an error, which is a bug.