| Message ID | alpine.LNX.2.00.1210160051100.1682@swampdragon.chaosbits.net (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 7:52 PM, Jesper Juhl <jj@chaosbits.net> wrote: > On Mon, 15 Oct 2012, Jesper Juhl wrote: > >> On Sat, 13 Oct 2012, Ezequiel Garcia wrote: >> >> > On Sun, Nov 9, 2008 at 2:04 PM, Jesper Juhl <jj@chaosbits.net> wrote: >> > > There are two checks for 'rc' being less than zero with no change to >> > > 'rc' between the two, so the second is just dead code - remove it. >> > > >> > > Signed-off-by: Jesper Juhl <jj@chaosbits.net> >> > > --- >> > > drivers/media/usb/stk1160/stk1160-i2c.c | 3 --- >> > > 1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) >> > > >> > > diff --git a/drivers/media/usb/stk1160/stk1160-i2c.c b/drivers/media/usb/stk1160/stk1160-i2c.c >> > > index 176ac93..035cf8c 100644 >> > > --- a/drivers/media/usb/stk1160/stk1160-i2c.c >> > > +++ b/drivers/media/usb/stk1160/stk1160-i2c.c >> > > @@ -117,9 +117,6 @@ static int stk1160_i2c_read_reg(struct stk1160 *dev, u8 addr, >> > > return rc; >> > > >> > > stk1160_read_reg(dev, STK1160_SBUSR_RD, value); >> > > - if (rc < 0) >> > > - return rc; >> > > - >> > > return 0; >> > > } >> > > >> > >> > Thanks for doing this. Wouldn't you like to save stk1160_read_reg >> > return code to rc, instead of this? >> > >> Ahh yes, I guess I was too quick to just assume it was dead code. >> Looking at it again; what you suggest must have been the original >> intention. I'll cook up a new patch. >> >> Thanks. >> > From: Jesper Juhl <jj@chaosbits.net> > Date: Sat, 13 Oct 2012 00:16:37 +0200 > Subject: [PATCH] [media] stk1160: Check return value of stk1160_read_reg() in stk1160_i2c_read_reg() > > Currently there are two checks for 'rc' being less than zero with no > change to 'rc' between the two, so the second is just dead code. > The intention seems to have been to assign the return value of > 'stk1160_read_reg()' to 'rc' before the (currently dead) second check > and then test /that/. This patch does that. > This is an overly complicated explanation for such a small patch. Can you try to simplify it? > Signed-off-by: Jesper Juhl <jj@chaosbits.net> > --- > drivers/media/usb/stk1160/stk1160-i2c.c | 3 +-- > 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/media/usb/stk1160/stk1160-i2c.c b/drivers/media/usb/stk1160/stk1160-i2c.c > index 176ac93..a2370e4 100644 > --- a/drivers/media/usb/stk1160/stk1160-i2c.c > +++ b/drivers/media/usb/stk1160/stk1160-i2c.c > @@ -116,10 +116,9 @@ static int stk1160_i2c_read_reg(struct stk1160 *dev, u8 addr, > if (rc < 0) > return rc; > > - stk1160_read_reg(dev, STK1160_SBUSR_RD, value); > + rc = stk1160_read_reg(dev, STK1160_SBUSR_RD, value); > if (rc < 0) > return rc; Why are you removing this line? > - > return 0; > } > Thanks, Ezequiel -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-media" 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/media/usb/stk1160/stk1160-i2c.c b/drivers/media/usb/stk1160/stk1160-i2c.c index 176ac93..a2370e4 100644 --- a/drivers/media/usb/stk1160/stk1160-i2c.c +++ b/drivers/media/usb/stk1160/stk1160-i2c.c @@ -116,10 +116,9 @@ static int stk1160_i2c_read_reg(struct stk1160 *dev, u8 addr, if (rc < 0) return rc; - stk1160_read_reg(dev, STK1160_SBUSR_RD, value); + rc = stk1160_read_reg(dev, STK1160_SBUSR_RD, value); if (rc < 0) return rc; - return 0; }