[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20210327154213.571aa263@dellmb.labs.office.nic.cz>
Date: Sat, 27 Mar 2021 15:42:13 +0100
From: Marek Behún <marek.behun@....cz>
To: Pali Rohár <pali@...nel.org>
Cc: Krzysztof Wilczyński <kw@...ux.com>,
Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
Kalle Valo <kvalo@...eaurora.org>,
Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <toke@...hat.com>,
Marek Behún <kabel@...nel.org>,
vtolkm@...il.com, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
Ilias Apalodimas <ilias.apalodimas@...aro.org>,
Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@...tlin.com>,
Jason Cooper <jason@...edaemon.net>, linux-pci@...r.kernel.org,
ath10k@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] PCI: Disallow retraining link for Atheros QCA98xx chips
on non-Gen1 PCIe bridges
On Sat, 27 Mar 2021 14:29:59 +0100
Pali Rohár <pali@...nel.org> wrote:
> I can change this to 'if (!ret)' if needed, no problem.
>
> I use 'if (!val)' mostly for boolean and pointer variables. If
> variable can contain more integer values then I lot of times I use
> '=='.
Comparing integer varibales with explicit literals is sensible, but
if a function returning integer returns 0 on success and negative value
on error, Linux kernel has a tradition of using just
if (!ret)
or
if (ret)
Marek
Powered by blists - more mailing lists