[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YHWsc3H8RzmdfvuR@lunn.ch>
Date: Tue, 13 Apr 2021 16:36:35 +0200
From: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
To: Marek BehĂșn <kabel@...nel.org>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Russell King <rmk+kernel@...linux.org.uk>, kuba@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 1/5] net: phy: marvell: refactor HWMON OOP style
> +static int marvell_hwmon_read(struct device *dev, enum hwmon_sensor_types type,
> + u32 attr, int channel, long *temp)
> {
> struct phy_device *phydev = dev_get_drvdata(dev);
> - int err;
> + const struct marvell_hwmon_ops *ops = to_marvell_hwmon_ops(phydev);
> + int err = -EOPNOTSUPP;
>
> switch (attr) {
> case hwmon_temp_input:
> - err = m88e6390_get_temp(phydev, temp);
> + if (ops->get_temp)
> + err = ops->get_temp(phydev, temp);
> + break;
> + case hwmon_temp_crit:
> + if (ops->get_temp_critical)
> + err = ops->get_temp_critical(phydev, temp);
> + break;
> + case hwmon_temp_max_alarm:
> + if (ops->get_temp_alarm)
> + err = ops->get_temp_alarm(phydev, temp);
> break;
> default:
> - return -EOPNOTSUPP;
> + fallthrough;
> + }
Does the default clause actually service any purpose?
And it is not falling through, it is falling out :-)
Andrew
Powered by blists - more mailing lists