[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ZNX72qCPBK0mzEVq@smile.fi.intel.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2023 12:14:02 +0300
From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To: Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl>
Cc: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
Kent Gibson <warthog618@...il.com>, linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] gpio: sim: simplify code with cleanup helpers
On Thu, Aug 10, 2023 at 09:04:12PM +0200, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 10, 2023 at 4:42 PM Andy Shevchenko
> <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 09, 2023 at 03:14:42PM +0200, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
...
> > > + scoped_guard(mutex, &chip->lock)
> > > + bitmap_replace(chip->value_map, chip->value_map, bits, mask,
> > > + gc->ngpio);
> >
> > Perhaps with {} ?
>
> This scoped_guard() thing is in essence a for loop, so I believe
> kernel coding style applies and a single statement doesn't require a
> {}.
You have two lines (or single wrapped line). I found to read it better with {}.
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists