| Message ID | 20190822065252.74028-1-yuehaibing@huawei.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | [-next] ASoC: sun4i-i2s: Use PTR_ERR_OR_ZERO in sun4i_i2s_init_regmap_fields() | expand |
Hi, On Thu, Aug 22, 2019 at 06:52:52AM +0000, YueHaibing wrote: > Use PTR_ERR_OR_ZERO rather than if(IS_ERR(...)) + PTR_ERR > > Signed-off-by: YueHaibing <yuehaibing@huawei.com> > --- > sound/soc/sunxi/sun4i-i2s.c | 5 +---- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 4 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/sound/soc/sunxi/sun4i-i2s.c b/sound/soc/sunxi/sun4i-i2s.c > index 9e691baee1e8..2071c54265f3 100644 > --- a/sound/soc/sunxi/sun4i-i2s.c > +++ b/sound/soc/sunxi/sun4i-i2s.c > @@ -1095,10 +1095,7 @@ static int sun4i_i2s_init_regmap_fields(struct device *dev, > i2s->field_fmt_sr = > devm_regmap_field_alloc(dev, i2s->regmap, > i2s->variant->field_fmt_sr); > - if (IS_ERR(i2s->field_fmt_sr)) > - return PTR_ERR(i2s->field_fmt_sr); > - > - return 0; > + return PTR_ERR_OR_ZERO(i2s->field_fmt_sr); I'm not really convinced that this more readable or more maintainable though. Is there a reason for this other than we can do it? Maxie -- Maxime Ripard, Bootlin Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering https://bootlin.com
On 2019/8/22 22:18, Maxime Ripard wrote: > Hi, > > On Thu, Aug 22, 2019 at 06:52:52AM +0000, YueHaibing wrote: >> Use PTR_ERR_OR_ZERO rather than if(IS_ERR(...)) + PTR_ERR >> >> Signed-off-by: YueHaibing <yuehaibing@huawei.com> >> --- >> sound/soc/sunxi/sun4i-i2s.c | 5 +---- >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 4 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/sound/soc/sunxi/sun4i-i2s.c b/sound/soc/sunxi/sun4i-i2s.c >> index 9e691baee1e8..2071c54265f3 100644 >> --- a/sound/soc/sunxi/sun4i-i2s.c >> +++ b/sound/soc/sunxi/sun4i-i2s.c >> @@ -1095,10 +1095,7 @@ static int sun4i_i2s_init_regmap_fields(struct device *dev, >> i2s->field_fmt_sr = >> devm_regmap_field_alloc(dev, i2s->regmap, >> i2s->variant->field_fmt_sr); >> - if (IS_ERR(i2s->field_fmt_sr)) >> - return PTR_ERR(i2s->field_fmt_sr); >> - >> - return 0; >> + return PTR_ERR_OR_ZERO(i2s->field_fmt_sr); > > I'm not really convinced that this more readable or more maintainable > though. Is there a reason for this other than we can do it? No special reason, just suggested by scripts/coccinelle/api/ptr_ret.cocci > > Maxie > > -- > Maxime Ripard, Bootlin > Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering > https://bootlin.com >
On Thu, Aug 22, 2019 at 10:34:37PM +0800, Yuehaibing wrote: > On 2019/8/22 22:18, Maxime Ripard wrote: > > On Thu, Aug 22, 2019 at 06:52:52AM +0000, YueHaibing wrote: > >> - if (IS_ERR(i2s->field_fmt_sr)) > >> - return PTR_ERR(i2s->field_fmt_sr); > >> - > >> - return 0; > >> + return PTR_ERR_OR_ZERO(i2s->field_fmt_sr); > > I'm not really convinced that this more readable or more maintainable > > though. Is there a reason for this other than we can do it? > No special reason, just suggested by scripts/coccinelle/api/ptr_ret.cocci Which is a bit of a reason in itself since it'll save other people looking at the same thing though with a return like this I have to agree with Maxime a bit and question if the coccinelle script is really a good idea.
diff --git a/sound/soc/sunxi/sun4i-i2s.c b/sound/soc/sunxi/sun4i-i2s.c index 9e691baee1e8..2071c54265f3 100644 --- a/sound/soc/sunxi/sun4i-i2s.c +++ b/sound/soc/sunxi/sun4i-i2s.c @@ -1095,10 +1095,7 @@ static int sun4i_i2s_init_regmap_fields(struct device *dev, i2s->field_fmt_sr = devm_regmap_field_alloc(dev, i2s->regmap, i2s->variant->field_fmt_sr); - if (IS_ERR(i2s->field_fmt_sr)) - return PTR_ERR(i2s->field_fmt_sr); - - return 0; + return PTR_ERR_OR_ZERO(i2s->field_fmt_sr); } static int sun4i_i2s_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
Use PTR_ERR_OR_ZERO rather than if(IS_ERR(...)) + PTR_ERR Signed-off-by: YueHaibing <yuehaibing@huawei.com> --- sound/soc/sunxi/sun4i-i2s.c | 5 +---- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 4 deletions(-)