On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 8:22 PM, SIMRAN SINGHAL <singhalsimr...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 6:23 PM, Lars-Peter Clausen <l...@metafoo.de> wrote: >> On 03/29/2017 02:40 PM, Julia Lawall wrote: >>> >>> >>> On Wed, 29 Mar 2017, simran singhal wrote: >>> >>>> Use macro min() to get the minimum of two values for brevity and >>>> readability. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: simran singhal <singhalsimr...@gmail.com> >>>> --- >>>> drivers/iio/light/si1145.c | 2 +- >>>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >>>> >>>> diff --git a/drivers/iio/light/si1145.c b/drivers/iio/light/si1145.c >>>> index 096034c..e7ad6fb 100644 >>>> --- a/drivers/iio/light/si1145.c >>>> +++ b/drivers/iio/light/si1145.c >>>> @@ -557,7 +557,7 @@ static int si1145_set_chlist(struct iio_dev >>>> *indio_dev, unsigned long scan_mask) >>>> data->scan_mask = scan_mask; >>>> ret = si1145_param_set(data, SI1145_PARAM_CHLIST, reg); >>>> >>>> - return ret < 0 ? ret : 0; >>>> + return min(ret, 0); >>> >>> A similar change involving max was already rejected. ret < 0 is a >>> standard way of detecting an error, so perhaps leaving that explicitly >>> present will be preferred. >> >> I think a more sensible thing to do here is to check whether ret/err can >> actually take any positive values and if not, replace the whole thing with >> just 'return ret;' or 'return some_fn()'. I'd expect that his can be done in >> most of the cases. >>
Lars, I will check it and resend it.
