[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20240318151839.okplnfpakp5y5lxj@dhruva>
Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2024 20:48:39 +0530
From: Dhruva Gole <d-gole@...com>
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>
CC: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>,
Adrian Hunter
<adrian.hunter@...el.com>,
Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>, Len Brown
<len.brown@...el.com>,
Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman
<gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>, <theo.lebrun@...tlin.com>,
<linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] PM: wakeup: Remove unnecessary else from
device_init_wakeup
On Mar 18, 2024 at 14:52:02 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 18, 2024 at 6:55 AM Dhruva Gole <d-gole@...com> wrote:
> >
> > Checkpatch warns that else is generally not necessary after a return
> > condition which exists in the if part of this function. Hence, just to
> > abide by what checkpatch recommends, follow it's guidelines.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Dhruva Gole <d-gole@...com>
> > ---
> > include/linux/pm_wakeup.h | 7 +++----
> > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/include/linux/pm_wakeup.h b/include/linux/pm_wakeup.h
> > index 428803eed798..76cd1f9f1365 100644
> > --- a/include/linux/pm_wakeup.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/pm_wakeup.h
> > @@ -234,11 +234,10 @@ static inline int device_init_wakeup(struct device *dev, bool enable)
> > if (enable) {
> > device_set_wakeup_capable(dev, true);
> > return device_wakeup_enable(dev);
> > - } else {
> > - device_wakeup_disable(dev);
> > - device_set_wakeup_capable(dev, false);
> > - return 0;
> > }
> > + device_wakeup_disable(dev);
> > + device_set_wakeup_capable(dev, false);
> > + return 0;
> > }
> >
> > #endif /* _LINUX_PM_WAKEUP_H */
> > --
>
> This one is fine with me, but not 6.9-rc material.
OK, I completely understand.
--
Best regards,
Dhruva Gole <d-gole@...com>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists