[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1336777357.3055.41.camel@jtkirshe-mobl>
Date: Fri, 11 May 2012 16:02:37 -0700
From: Jeff Kirsher <jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com>
To: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc: carolyn.wyborny@...el.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
gospo@...hat.com, sassmann@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [net-next 2/2] igb: Add Support for new i210/i211 devices.
On Fri, 2012-05-11 at 18:27 -0400, David Miller wrote:
> From: Jeff Kirsher <jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com>
> Date: Fri, 11 May 2012 01:01:22 -0700
>
> > +s32 igb_acquire_nvm_i210(struct e1000_hw *hw)
> > +{
> > + s32 ret_val;
> > +
> > + ret_val = igb_acquire_swfw_sync_i210(hw, E1000_SWFW_EEP_SM);
> > +
> > + return ret_val;
> > +}
>
> Please, this is just unnecessary syntactic masterbation, simplify this
> to:
>
> s32 igb_acquire_nvm_i210(struct e1000_hw *hw)
> {
> return igb_acquire_swfw_sync_i210(hw, E1000_SWFW_EEP_SM);
> }
>
> And:
>
> > +void igb_release_nvm_i210(struct e1000_hw *hw)
> > +{
> > +
> > + igb_release_swfw_sync_i210(hw, E1000_SWFW_EEP_SM);
> > +}
>
> Please get rid of that unnecessary empty line.
>
> I can really tell when someone is extremely careless when removing
> their debugging code, and I can almost guarentee that's what has
> happened here.
Dave,
I get this cleaned up for Carolyn. I will wait to re-submit till later
tonight to ensure that there is no other feedback or comments that need
to be addressed.
Cheers,
Jeff
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (837 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists