| Message ID | 20240318055054.1564696-3-d-gole@ti.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
| Series | PM: wakeup: make device_wakeup_disable return void | expand |
On Mon, Mar 18, 2024 at 6:55 AM Dhruva Gole <d-gole@ti.com> wrote: > > Checkpatch warns that else is generally not necessary after a return > condition which exists in the if part of this function. Hence, just to > abide by what checkpatch recommends, follow it's guidelines. > > Signed-off-by: Dhruva Gole <d-gole@ti.com> > --- > include/linux/pm_wakeup.h | 7 +++---- > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/include/linux/pm_wakeup.h b/include/linux/pm_wakeup.h > index 428803eed798..76cd1f9f1365 100644 > --- a/include/linux/pm_wakeup.h > +++ b/include/linux/pm_wakeup.h > @@ -234,11 +234,10 @@ static inline int device_init_wakeup(struct device *dev, bool enable) > if (enable) { > device_set_wakeup_capable(dev, true); > return device_wakeup_enable(dev); > - } else { > - device_wakeup_disable(dev); > - device_set_wakeup_capable(dev, false); > - return 0; > } > + device_wakeup_disable(dev); > + device_set_wakeup_capable(dev, false); > + return 0; > } > > #endif /* _LINUX_PM_WAKEUP_H */ > -- This one is fine with me, but not 6.9-rc material. Thanks!
On Mar 18, 2024 at 14:52:02 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Mon, Mar 18, 2024 at 6:55 AM Dhruva Gole <d-gole@ti.com> wrote: > > > > Checkpatch warns that else is generally not necessary after a return > > condition which exists in the if part of this function. Hence, just to > > abide by what checkpatch recommends, follow it's guidelines. > > > > Signed-off-by: Dhruva Gole <d-gole@ti.com> > > --- > > include/linux/pm_wakeup.h | 7 +++---- > > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/include/linux/pm_wakeup.h b/include/linux/pm_wakeup.h > > index 428803eed798..76cd1f9f1365 100644 > > --- a/include/linux/pm_wakeup.h > > +++ b/include/linux/pm_wakeup.h > > @@ -234,11 +234,10 @@ static inline int device_init_wakeup(struct device *dev, bool enable) > > if (enable) { > > device_set_wakeup_capable(dev, true); > > return device_wakeup_enable(dev); > > - } else { > > - device_wakeup_disable(dev); > > - device_set_wakeup_capable(dev, false); > > - return 0; > > } > > + device_wakeup_disable(dev); > > + device_set_wakeup_capable(dev, false); > > + return 0; > > } > > > > #endif /* _LINUX_PM_WAKEUP_H */ > > -- > > This one is fine with me, but not 6.9-rc material. OK, I completely understand.
diff --git a/include/linux/pm_wakeup.h b/include/linux/pm_wakeup.h index 428803eed798..76cd1f9f1365 100644 --- a/include/linux/pm_wakeup.h +++ b/include/linux/pm_wakeup.h @@ -234,11 +234,10 @@ static inline int device_init_wakeup(struct device *dev, bool enable) if (enable) { device_set_wakeup_capable(dev, true); return device_wakeup_enable(dev); - } else { - device_wakeup_disable(dev); - device_set_wakeup_capable(dev, false); - return 0; } + device_wakeup_disable(dev); + device_set_wakeup_capable(dev, false); + return 0; } #endif /* _LINUX_PM_WAKEUP_H */
Checkpatch warns that else is generally not necessary after a return condition which exists in the if part of this function. Hence, just to abide by what checkpatch recommends, follow it's guidelines. Signed-off-by: Dhruva Gole <d-gole@ti.com> --- include/linux/pm_wakeup.h | 7 +++---- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)