* [PATCH] regulator/core.c: remove the else statement
@ 2017-04-18 15:39 hubiaoyong
2017-04-18 15:49 ` Mark Brown
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: hubiaoyong @ 2017-04-18 15:39 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: lgirdwood; +Cc: broonie, linux-kernel, hby2003, hubiaoyong
in the function regulator_ena_gpio_free, the if branch contains
the return statement, so remove the else statement.
Signed-off-by: hubiaoyong <hubiaoyong@gmail.com>
---
drivers/regulator/core.c | 3 +--
1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/regulator/core.c b/drivers/regulator/core.c
index 53d4fc7..de3d07a 100644
--- a/drivers/regulator/core.c
+++ b/drivers/regulator/core.c
@@ -2007,9 +2007,8 @@ static void regulator_ena_gpio_free(struct regulator_dev *rdev)
kfree(pin);
rdev->ena_pin = NULL;
return;
- } else {
- pin->request_count--;
}
+ pin->request_count--;
}
}
}
--
1.7.1
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] regulator/core.c: remove the else statement
2017-04-18 15:39 [PATCH] regulator/core.c: remove the else statement hubiaoyong
@ 2017-04-18 15:49 ` Mark Brown
2017-04-18 16:28 ` Joe Perches
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Mark Brown @ 2017-04-18 15:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: hubiaoyong; +Cc: lgirdwood, linux-kernel, hby2003
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 222 bytes --]
On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 11:39:34PM +0800, hubiaoyong wrote:
> in the function regulator_ena_gpio_free, the if branch contains
> the return statement, so remove the else statement.
Why is it a benefit to make this change?
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] regulator/core.c: remove the else statement
2017-04-18 15:49 ` Mark Brown
@ 2017-04-18 16:28 ` Joe Perches
[not found] ` <CAJPOojYT0Mk-+_Enmtz6C1ZRGDmMcnQLMAOXvGwKAs+bM67tMg@mail.gmail.com>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Joe Perches @ 2017-04-18 16:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Mark Brown, hubiaoyong; +Cc: lgirdwood, linux-kernel, hby2003
On Tue, 2017-04-18 at 16:49 +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 11:39:34PM +0800, hubiaoyong wrote:
> > in the function regulator_ena_gpio_free, the if branch contains
> > the return statement, so remove the else statement.
>
> Why is it a benefit to make this change?
In general, reducing source code indentation is a good thing.
The logic today is:
/* Free the GPIO only in case of no use */
list_for_each_entry_safe(pin, n, ®ulator_ena_gpio_list, list) {
if (pin->gpiod == rdev->ena_pin->gpiod) {
if (pin->request_count <= 1) {
pin->request_count = 0;
gpiod_put(pin->gpiod);
list_del(&pin->list);
kfree(pin);
rdev->ena_pin = NULL;
return;
} else {
pin->request_count--;
}
}
}
Perhaps it's better written as:
/* Free the GPIO only in case of no use */
list_for_each_entry_safe(pin, n, ®ulator_ena_gpio_list, list) {
if (pin->gpiod != rdev->ena_pin->gpiod)
continue;
if (pin->request_count <= 1) {
pin->request_count = 0;
gpiod_put(pin->gpiod);
list_del(&pin->list);
kfree(pin);
rdev->ena_pin = NULL;
return;
}
pin->request_count--;
}
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2017-04-19 16:26 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2017-04-18 15:39 [PATCH] regulator/core.c: remove the else statement hubiaoyong
2017-04-18 15:49 ` Mark Brown
2017-04-18 16:28 ` Joe Perches
[not found] ` <CAJPOojYT0Mk-+_Enmtz6C1ZRGDmMcnQLMAOXvGwKAs+bM67tMg@mail.gmail.com>
2017-04-19 16:26 ` Mark Brown
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).