| Message ID | 7782b4f1-deed-49dc-8207-b6ea06d7602f@moroto.mountain (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Accepted, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | clk: at91: remove unnecessary conditions | expand |
On 17.10.2023 17:06, Dan Carpenter wrote: > This code checks "if (parent_hw)" is non-NULL, but then it has more > checks if parent_hw is non-NULL on the lines inside the if statement. > It is a bit confusing. > > For the else statement, keep in mind that at the start of the function > we checked: > > if (!(parent_name || parent_hw)) > return ERR_PTR(-EINVAL); > > That check ensures that if parent_hw is NULL that means that parent_name > is non-NULL. At least one must always be non-NULL. So here again, the > checks inside the if statement can be removed. > > In the original code, it was a bit confusing and you could easily get > the impression that "init.num_parents" could be zero. When we remove > the unnecessary checking it's more obvious that it's always set to 1. > > Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@linaro.org> I had something similar in my queue to submit, but didn't manage to do it yet. Thanks for taking care of it. Reviewed-by: Claudiu Beznea <claudiu.beznea@tuxon.dev> > --- > drivers/clk/at91/clk-utmi.c | 12 +++++------- > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/clk/at91/clk-utmi.c b/drivers/clk/at91/clk-utmi.c > index 40c84f5af5e8..b991180beea1 100644 > --- a/drivers/clk/at91/clk-utmi.c > +++ b/drivers/clk/at91/clk-utmi.c > @@ -161,13 +161,11 @@ at91_clk_register_utmi_internal(struct regmap *regmap_pmc, > > init.name = name; > init.ops = ops; > - if (parent_hw) { > - init.parent_hws = parent_hw ? (const struct clk_hw **)&parent_hw : NULL; > - init.num_parents = parent_hw ? 1 : 0; > - } else { > - init.parent_names = parent_name ? &parent_name : NULL; > - init.num_parents = parent_name ? 1 : 0; > - } > + if (parent_hw) > + init.parent_hws = (const struct clk_hw **)&parent_hw; > + else > + init.parent_names = &parent_name; > + init.num_parents = 1; > init.flags = flags; > > utmi->hw.init = &init;
Quoting Dan Carpenter (2023-10-17 07:06:53) > This code checks "if (parent_hw)" is non-NULL, but then it has more > checks if parent_hw is non-NULL on the lines inside the if statement. > It is a bit confusing. > > For the else statement, keep in mind that at the start of the function > we checked: > > if (!(parent_name || parent_hw)) > return ERR_PTR(-EINVAL); > > That check ensures that if parent_hw is NULL that means that parent_name > is non-NULL. At least one must always be non-NULL. So here again, the > checks inside the if statement can be removed. > > In the original code, it was a bit confusing and you could easily get > the impression that "init.num_parents" could be zero. When we remove > the unnecessary checking it's more obvious that it's always set to 1. > > Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@linaro.org> > --- Applied to clk-next
diff --git a/drivers/clk/at91/clk-utmi.c b/drivers/clk/at91/clk-utmi.c index 40c84f5af5e8..b991180beea1 100644 --- a/drivers/clk/at91/clk-utmi.c +++ b/drivers/clk/at91/clk-utmi.c @@ -161,13 +161,11 @@ at91_clk_register_utmi_internal(struct regmap *regmap_pmc, init.name = name; init.ops = ops; - if (parent_hw) { - init.parent_hws = parent_hw ? (const struct clk_hw **)&parent_hw : NULL; - init.num_parents = parent_hw ? 1 : 0; - } else { - init.parent_names = parent_name ? &parent_name : NULL; - init.num_parents = parent_name ? 1 : 0; - } + if (parent_hw) + init.parent_hws = (const struct clk_hw **)&parent_hw; + else + init.parent_names = &parent_name; + init.num_parents = 1; init.flags = flags; utmi->hw.init = &init;
This code checks "if (parent_hw)" is non-NULL, but then it has more checks if parent_hw is non-NULL on the lines inside the if statement. It is a bit confusing. For the else statement, keep in mind that at the start of the function we checked: if (!(parent_name || parent_hw)) return ERR_PTR(-EINVAL); That check ensures that if parent_hw is NULL that means that parent_name is non-NULL. At least one must always be non-NULL. So here again, the checks inside the if statement can be removed. In the original code, it was a bit confusing and you could easily get the impression that "init.num_parents" could be zero. When we remove the unnecessary checking it's more obvious that it's always set to 1. Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@linaro.org> --- drivers/clk/at91/clk-utmi.c | 12 +++++------- 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)