[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YZzVjNVI3hySmC3o@paasikivi.fi.intel.com>
Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2021 13:50:36 +0200
From: Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@...ux.intel.com>
To: Luca Ceresoli <luca@...aceresoli.net>
Cc: Eugen Hristev <eugen.hristev@...rochip.com>,
leonl@...pardimaging.com, linux-media@...r.kernel.org,
skomatineni@...dia.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] media: i2c: imx274: simplify probe function by
adding local variable dev
Hi Luca,
On Tue, Nov 23, 2021 at 12:35:42PM +0100, Luca Ceresoli wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 23/11/21 12:25, Sakari Ailus wrote:
> > Hi Eugen,
> >
> > On Tue, Nov 23, 2021 at 01:15:20PM +0200, Eugen Hristev wrote:
> >> Simplify probe function by adding a local variable dev instead of using
> >> &client->dev all the time.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Eugen Hristev <eugen.hristev@...rochip.com>
> >
> > It's not really wrong to do this, but is it useful?
> It is of course a matter of personal taste, but I also prefer a short
> name in cases such as this where the same member is accessed a lot of
> times. To me it makes code simpler to read and even to write.
>
> > You can't even unwrap a single line, the lines are just made a little bit
> > shorter.
>
> Let's be fair, he did unwrap 4. :)
Ah, yes, you're right.
But at least one could have been wrapped without the change. :-)
>
> As said, it is a matter of taste so I'll be OK it this patch is dropped.
> But since I like it and it looks correct:
>
> Reviewed-by: Luca Ceresoli <luca@...aceresoli.net>
--
Sakari Ailus
Powered by blists - more mailing lists