[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ZNZGKPq7f5l9yCjB@smile.fi.intel.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2023 17:31:04 +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 v2] gpio: sim: simplify code with cleanup helpers
On Fri, Aug 11, 2023 at 04:28:38PM +0200, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 11, 2023 at 4:24 PM Andy Shevchenko
> <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
> > On Fri, Aug 11, 2023 at 03:14:27PM +0200, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
...
> > > struct gpio_sim_device *dev = gpio_sim_bank_get_device(bank);
> > > struct gpio_sim_chip_name_ctx ctx = { bank->swnode, page };
> > > - int ret;
> > >
> > > - mutex_lock(&dev->lock);
> > > + guard(mutex)(&dev->lock);
> > > +
> > > if (gpio_sim_device_is_live_unlocked(dev))
> > > - ret = device_for_each_child(&dev->pdev->dev, &ctx,
> > > - gpio_sim_emit_chip_name);
> > > - else
> > > - ret = sprintf(page, "none\n");
> > > - mutex_unlock(&dev->lock);
> > > + return device_for_each_child(&dev->pdev->dev, &ctx,
> > > + gpio_sim_emit_chip_name);
> > >
> > > - return ret;
> > > + return sprintf(page, "none\n");
> >
> > I looked at the original and at the change and maybe it could be done as
> >
>
> What's the difference?!
>
> > struct device *parent = &dev->pdev->dev; // Naming?
> > bool live;
> >
> > live = gpio_sim_device_is_live_unlocked(dev);
> > if (!live)
> > return sprintf(page, "none\n");
> >
> > return device_for_each_child(parent, &ctx, gpio_sim_emit_chip_name);
No wrapped lines.
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists