[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20210327173327.tfn4mjq3cvrq33qu@pali>
Date: Sat, 27 Mar 2021 18:33:27 +0100
From: Pali Rohár <pali@...nel.org>
To: Marek Behún <marek.behun@....cz>
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>,
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 Saturday 27 March 2021 15:42:13 Marek Behún wrote:
> 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
Ok, I will change it.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists