[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <xsbimlqvca7bw3ftithqxknvnvqc7ls4llex4vmthl5nag2xmd@oslabr4ecqnm>
Date: Sat, 6 Apr 2024 20:38:50 +0200
From: Andi Shyti <andi.shyti@...nel.org>
To: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: Nuno Sa <nuno.sa@...log.com>, Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>,
Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>, Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@...afoo.de>,
Olivier Moysan <olivier.moysan@...s.st.com>, Jyoti Bhayana <jbhayana@...gle.com>,
Chris Down <chris@...isdown.name>, John Ogness <john.ogness@...utronix.de>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-iio@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] iio: temperature: ltc2983: convert to dev_err_probe()
Hi Andy,
On Thu, Apr 04, 2024 at 03:18:05PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 04, 2024 at 01:06:24PM +0200, Nuno Sa wrote:
> > Use dev_err_probe() in the probe() path. While at it, made some simple
> > improvements:
> > * Declare a struct device *dev helper. This also makes the style more
> > consistent (some places the helper was used and not in other places);
> > * Explicitly included the err.h and errno.h headers;
> > * Removed an useless else if();
> > * Removed some unnecessary line breaks.
>
> ...
>
> > if (!(thermo->sensor_config & LTC2983_THERMOCOUPLE_DIFF_MASK) &&
> > - sensor->chan < LTC2983_DIFFERENTIAL_CHAN_MIN) {
>
> It's better if you leave {} when the body goes after a single line.
> This applies to your entire series.
I think checkpatch complains if you leave the {...} and,
honestly, I'm not a big fan of the {...}. Unless there is a last
minute rule I missed.
If checkpatch doesn't complain, I'm OK with both ways, though.
Andi
Powered by blists - more mailing lists