Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Sat, 8 May 2021 14:32:20 +0300
From:   Pavel Skripkin <paskripkin@gmail.com>
To:     Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Cc:     mchehab@kernel.org, sakari.ailus@linux.intel.com,
        linux-media@vger.kernel.org, linux-staging@lists.linux.dev,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] staging: media: atomisp: code cleanup
Message-ID: <20210508143220.0b92bc37@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <YJZuviLa3SRLWASk@kroah.com>
References: <20210507075458.GB3@paasikivi.fi.intel.com>
        <20210508105129.2698-1-paskripkin@gmail.com>
        <YJZuviLa3SRLWASk@kroah.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

Hi, Greg!

On Sat, 8 May 2021 12:58:06 +0200
Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:

> On Sat, May 08, 2021 at 01:51:29PM +0300, Pavel Skripkin wrote:
> > Breaks are not useful after a return, they can
> > simply be removed.
> > 
> > Also, dropped the individual return statements
> > after or inside switch cases
> 
> Almost always, when you say "also" in a patch changelog, that means
> this should be split up into two different patches.
> 

I thought, I could add this to current patch, because It was suggested
by maintainer, but, I guess, I was wrong :)

> I recommend doing that here as well, this should be a 2 patch series,
> right?
> 

Thanks for suggestion! I will also remove returns at the end of void
functions as 3rd patch in serie.

> thanks,
> 
> greg k-h

With regards,
Pavel Skripkin