| Message ID | 1465339484-969-11-git-send-email-dianders@chromium.org (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
On 2016/6/8 6:44, Douglas Anderson wrote: > There's no reason to store the return value of rockchip_emmc_phy_power() > in a variable nor to check it. Just return it. > > Signed-off-by: Douglas Anderson <dianders@chromium.org> > --- > drivers/phy/phy-rockchip-emmc.c | 8 +------- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 7 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/phy/phy-rockchip-emmc.c b/drivers/phy/phy-rockchip-emmc.c > index 0fce7359d468..188e4c387ba8 100644 > --- a/drivers/phy/phy-rockchip-emmc.c > +++ b/drivers/phy/phy-rockchip-emmc.c > @@ -227,8 +227,6 @@ static int rockchip_emmc_phy_power_off(struct phy *phy) > static int rockchip_emmc_phy_power_on(struct phy *phy) > { I saw the cleanup for power_off is done on [patch 9/11] shouldn't be in this patch? :) > struct rockchip_emmc_phy *rk_phy = phy_get_drvdata(phy); > - int ret = 0; > - > > /* Drive impedance: 50 Ohm */ > regmap_write(rk_phy->reg_base, > @@ -252,11 +250,7 @@ static int rockchip_emmc_phy_power_on(struct phy *phy) > PHYCTRL_OTAPDLYSEL_SHIFT)); > > /* Power up emmc phy analog blocks */ > - ret = rockchip_emmc_phy_power(phy, PHYCTRL_PDB_PWR_ON); > - if (ret) > - return ret; > - > - return 0; > + return rockchip_emmc_phy_power(phy, PHYCTRL_PDB_PWR_ON); > } > > static const struct phy_ops ops = { >
Hi, On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 1:56 AM, Shawn Lin <shawn.lin@rock-chips.com> wrote: > On 2016/6/8 6:44, Douglas Anderson wrote: >> >> There's no reason to store the return value of rockchip_emmc_phy_power() >> in a variable nor to check it. Just return it. >> >> Signed-off-by: Douglas Anderson <dianders@chromium.org> >> --- >> drivers/phy/phy-rockchip-emmc.c | 8 +------- >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 7 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/phy/phy-rockchip-emmc.c >> b/drivers/phy/phy-rockchip-emmc.c >> index 0fce7359d468..188e4c387ba8 100644 >> --- a/drivers/phy/phy-rockchip-emmc.c >> +++ b/drivers/phy/phy-rockchip-emmc.c >> @@ -227,8 +227,6 @@ static int rockchip_emmc_phy_power_off(struct phy >> *phy) >> static int rockchip_emmc_phy_power_on(struct phy *phy) >> { > > > I saw the cleanup for power_off is done on [patch 9/11] > > shouldn't be in this patch? :) Yeah, I tried to, but then I realized that I couldn't split that out too easily because the previous patch touched the same code. ...but actually, reordering things solves all the problems so I've done that. -Doug -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-mmc" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
diff --git a/drivers/phy/phy-rockchip-emmc.c b/drivers/phy/phy-rockchip-emmc.c index 0fce7359d468..188e4c387ba8 100644 --- a/drivers/phy/phy-rockchip-emmc.c +++ b/drivers/phy/phy-rockchip-emmc.c @@ -227,8 +227,6 @@ static int rockchip_emmc_phy_power_off(struct phy *phy) static int rockchip_emmc_phy_power_on(struct phy *phy) { struct rockchip_emmc_phy *rk_phy = phy_get_drvdata(phy); - int ret = 0; - /* Drive impedance: 50 Ohm */ regmap_write(rk_phy->reg_base, @@ -252,11 +250,7 @@ static int rockchip_emmc_phy_power_on(struct phy *phy) PHYCTRL_OTAPDLYSEL_SHIFT)); /* Power up emmc phy analog blocks */ - ret = rockchip_emmc_phy_power(phy, PHYCTRL_PDB_PWR_ON); - if (ret) - return ret; - - return 0; + return rockchip_emmc_phy_power(phy, PHYCTRL_PDB_PWR_ON); } static const struct phy_ops ops = {
There's no reason to store the return value of rockchip_emmc_phy_power() in a variable nor to check it. Just return it. Signed-off-by: Douglas Anderson <dianders@chromium.org> --- drivers/phy/phy-rockchip-emmc.c | 8 +------- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 7 deletions(-)