lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2017]   [Jun]   [9]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH] thermal: int340x: check for sensor when PTYP is missing
On Sat, Jun 10, 2017 at 1:23 AM, Srinivas Pandruvada
<srinivas.pandruvada@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 2017-06-07 at 13:55 +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>> On Wed, Jun 7, 2017 at 2:00 AM, Srinivas Pandruvada
>> <srinivas.pandruvada@linux.intel.com> wrote:

>> > This change checks for the presence of _TMP method and if present,
>> > then
>> > treats this device as a sensor.
>> >
>> > status = acpi_evaluate_integer(priv->adev->handle, "PTYP",
>> > NULL, &priv->type);
>> > if (ACPI_FAILURE(status)) {
>> > - result = -EINVAL;
>> > - goto err;
>> >
>> > + unsigned long long tmp;
>> You may use &priv->type as temporary variable, though I would go
>> other
>> way around:
>> declare tmp for function, then
>>
>> unsigned long long tmp;
>> ...
>> status = acpi_evaluate_integer(priv->adev->handle, "PTYP", NULL,
>> &tmp);
>> if (ACPI_FAILURE(status)) {
>> status = acpi_evaluate_integer(priv->adev->handle, "_TMP",
>> NULL, &tmp);
>> if (ACPI_FAILURE(status)) {
>> result = -EINVAL;
>> goto err;
>> }
>> tmp = INT3403_TYPE_SENSOR;
>> }
>> priv->type = tmp;
>>
> So what are we saving by doing this way?

We make priv->type assignment in one place.

That's the difference.

So, you may choose your way of course. It's not a big deal.

--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2017-06-12 01:53    [W:1.496 / U:0.056 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site