Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Fri, 1 Nov 2019 15:53:43 +0100
From:   Maxime Ripard <mripard@kernel.org>
To:     zhong jiang <zhongjiang@huawei.com>
Cc:     broonie@kernel.org, lgirdwood@gmail.com, perex@perex.cz,
        tiwai@suse.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ASoC: sun4i: Use PTR_ERR_OR_ZERO to simplify the code
Message-ID: <20191101145343.4nazxxztj5sfcuxm@hendrix>
References: <1572530979-27595-1-git-send-email-zhongjiang@huawei.com>
 <20191101091355.ibbet6a2zb23bpjn@hendrix>
 <5DBC1D3E.8080705@huawei.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256;
        protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="fghmn2akruuf7rkm"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <5DBC1D3E.8080705@huawei.com>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk


--fghmn2akruuf7rkm
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline

On Fri, Nov 01, 2019 at 07:55:42PM +0800, zhong jiang wrote:
> On 2019/11/1 17:13, Maxime Ripard wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 31, 2019 at 10:09:39PM +0800, zhong jiang wrote:
> >> It is better to use PTR_ERR_OR_ZERO rather than if(IS_ERR(...)) + PTR_ERR.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: zhong jiang <zhongjiang@huawei.com>
> >> ---
> >>  sound/soc/sunxi/sun4i-i2s.c | 4 +---
> >>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 3 deletions(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/sound/soc/sunxi/sun4i-i2s.c b/sound/soc/sunxi/sun4i-i2s.c
> >> index d0a8d58..72012a6 100644
> >> --- a/sound/soc/sunxi/sun4i-i2s.c
> >> +++ b/sound/soc/sunxi/sun4i-i2s.c
> >> @@ -1174,10 +1174,8 @@ 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 don't find it "better". This couples the error handling and the
> > success case, and it makes it harder to extend in the future.
>
> PTR_ERR_OR_ZERO has implemented the if(IS_ERR(...)) + PTR_ERR. It is
> feasible to replace it and more readable at least now.
>
> As you said,  PTR_ERR_OR_ZERO should be removed ? :-(

No, I'm saying that in this context, this change isn't necessary.

Maxime

--fghmn2akruuf7rkm
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iHUEABYIAB0WIQRcEzekXsqa64kGDp7j7w1vZxhRxQUCXbxG9wAKCRDj7w1vZxhR
xZ42AQDQlwiNlRaoXcmwlcL4rb+Xeg2H3yhdzRa5fc61mvBkgwD9HIeK126LjhXW
5Zhap6t6j9ek4YsuLZExdBqcUv9jfg0=
=d28i
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--fghmn2akruuf7rkm--