[PATCH v1 1/2] cmd: bind: Fix driver binding on a device

Patrice CHOTARD patrice.chotard at foss.st.com
Fri Apr 9 16:34:16 CEST 2021



On 4/9/21 3:41 PM, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 09, 2021 at 09:13:12AM -0400, Sean Anderson wrote:
>> On 4/9/21 8:05 AM, Patrice CHOTARD wrote:
>>> On 4/9/21 1:01 PM, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>>>> On Fri, Apr 9, 2021 at 1:32 PM Patrice CHOTARD
>>>> <patrice.chotard at foss.st.com> wrote:
>>>>> On 4/9/21 11:48 AM, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>>>>>> On Fri, Apr 9, 2021 at 12:28 PM Patrice CHOTARD
>>>>>> <patrice.chotard at foss.st.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> On 4/9/21 11:16 AM, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Fri, Apr 9, 2021 at 10:37 AM Patrice Chotard
>>>>>>>> <patrice.chotard at foss.st.com> wrote:
> 
> ...
> 
>>>>>>>>> +                       if (drv) {
>>>>>>>>> +                               if (drv == entry)
>>>>>>>>> +                                       break;
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> +                       } else {
>>>>>>>>> +                               if (!ret)
>>>>>>>>> +                                       break;
>>>>>>>>> +                       }
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> This can be simplified to
>>>>>>>> } else if (!ret)
>>>>>>>>    break;
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I know but checkpatch.pl requested it ;-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You mean it doesn't recognize 'else if' construction? Then it's a bug
>>>>>> there for sure.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> No, i mean checkpath.pl request to put {} on all statements as shown below :
>>>>>
>>>>> ./scripts/checkpatch.pl 0001-cmd-bind-Fix-driver-binding-on-a-device.patch
>>>>> CHECK: braces {} should be used on all arms of this statement
>>>>> #83: FILE: drivers/core/lists.c:228:
>>>>> +                       if (drv) {
>>>>> [...]
>>>>> +                       } else if (!ret)
>>>>
>>>> So, you still can put else and if on one line, right?
>>>>
>>>
>>> No, if i put else and if on one line as you suggested, checkpatch.pl is complaining as shown above.
>>>
>>> Patrice
>>>
>>
>> } else if (!ret) {
>> 	break;
>> }
>>
>> ?
> 
> Thanks, that's fine for me. Does checkpatch.pl complain on this?
> 

This implementation is OK too, checkpatch is happy with it.



More information about the U-Boot mailing list