[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Y86im5M49p3ePGxj@kili>
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2023 18:07:07 +0300
From: Dan Carpenter <error27@...il.com>
To: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>,
Cristian Marussi <cristian.marussi@....com>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH] firmware: arm_scmi: Clean up a return statement
The comments say "enabled" where "disabled" is intended. Also it's
cleaner to return zero explicitly instead of ret.
Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <error27@...il.com>
---
drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/driver.c | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/driver.c b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/driver.c
index d21c7eafd641..703f16ef3953 100644
--- a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/driver.c
+++ b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/driver.c
@@ -2739,8 +2739,8 @@ static int scmi_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
if (ret)
goto clear_dev_req_notifier;
- /* Bail out anyway when coex enabled */
- return ret;
+ /* Bail out anyway when coex disabled. */
+ return 0;
}
/* Coex enabled, carry on in any case. */
--
2.35.1
Powered by blists - more mailing lists