Messages in this thread | | | From | Rusty Russell <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] drivers: virtio: Use PTR_RET function | Date | Tue, 26 Mar 2013 13:57:09 +1030 |
| |
Alexandru Gheorghiu <gheorghiuandru@gmail.com> writes:
> Used PTR_RET function instead of IS_ERR and PTR_ERR. > Patch found using coccinelle.
WTF is PTR_RET? PTR_RET doesn't return anything. Why is it called that? It doesn't even make sense.
ZERO_OR_PTR_ERR() maybe.
But what problem are we solving? Insufficient churn in the tree? Code being too readable? This isn't some hard-to-get right corner case, or a missed optimization.
Andrew, what am I missing here?
Grumpy, Rusty.
> Signed-off-by: Alexandru Gheorghiu <gheorghiuandru@gmail.com> > --- > drivers/virtio/virtio_mmio.c | 5 +---- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 4 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/virtio/virtio_mmio.c b/drivers/virtio/virtio_mmio.c > index 1ba0d68..d1e664f 100644 > --- a/drivers/virtio/virtio_mmio.c > +++ b/drivers/virtio/virtio_mmio.c > @@ -567,10 +567,7 @@ static int vm_cmdline_set(const char *device, > pdev = platform_device_register_resndata(&vm_cmdline_parent, > "virtio-mmio", vm_cmdline_id++, > resources, ARRAY_SIZE(resources), NULL, 0); > - if (IS_ERR(pdev)) > - return PTR_ERR(pdev); > - > - return 0; > + return PTR_RET(pdev); > } > > static int vm_cmdline_get_device(struct device *dev, void *data) > -- > 1.7.9.5
| |