Re: [PATCH] iio:potentiostat:lmp91000: solve codestyle WARNINGs and CHECKs

[Lucas Oshiro]

Thanks! I'll send those changes in my next patchset.

On 02/02/2019 08:00, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> On Fri, 1 Feb 2019 12:29:11 -0200
> LSO <lucasseikioshiro@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > Thanks for the review!
> >
> > On 29/01/2019 20:48, Joe Perches wrote:
> > > On Tue, 2019-01-29 at 16:36 -0200, Lucas Oshiro wrote:
> > > > Solve most of the checkpatch.pl WARNINGs and CHECKs on lmp9100.c. They
> > > > are the following:
> > > >
> > > > lmp91000.c:116: CHECK: Unnecessary parentheses around 'state != channel'
> > > > lmp91000.c:116: CHECK: Unnecessary parentheses around 'channel == LMP91000_REG_MODECN_TEMP'
> > > > lmp91000.c:214: CHECK: braces {} should be used on all arms of this statement
> > > > lmp91000.c:216: CHECK: Unbalanced braces around else statement
> > > > lmp91000.c:258: WARNING: line over 80 characters
> > > > lmp91000.c:279: CHECK: Please don't use multiple blank lines
> > >
> > > Some will say this is too many things to do at once.
> > > I think it's mostly fine, but there are a few nits
> > > that also could use fixing.
>
> Always a case of personal judgement.
> I agree that this one 'just' falls on the side of not too many things for one
> patch.  If there had been a few more items then it would have been too much.
>
> I would also have been happy with it broken out.  If I had been spinning
> it myself, I would have done it as 3 patches in pairs from your list
> above with the last one grouping the white space changes.
>
> The test inversion below is also stretching beyond simple style
> so probably should be broken out.
>
> > >    
> > > > diff --git a/drivers/iio/potentiostat/lmp91000.c b/drivers/iio/potentiostat/lmp91000.c
> > > []
> > > > @@ -211,9 +211,9 @@ static int lmp91000_read_config(struct lmp91000_data *data)
> > > >    
> > > >    	ret = of_property_read_u32(np, "ti,tia-gain-ohm", &val);
> > > >    	if (ret) {
> > > > -		if (of_property_read_bool(np, "ti,external-tia-resistor"))
> > > > +		if (of_property_read_bool(np, "ti,external-tia-resistor")) {
> > > >    			val = 0;
> > > > -		else {
> > > > +		} else {
> > > >    			dev_err(dev, "no ti,tia-gain-ohm defined");
> > > >    			return ret;
> > > >    		}
> > >
> > > This could use inverting the test
> > >
> > > 	if (ret) {
> > > 		if (!of_property_read_bool(...)) {
> > > 			dev_err(dev, "no ti,ti-gain-ohm defined\n");
> > > 			return ret;
> > > 		}
> > > 		val = 0;
> > > 	}
> > >   
> > Thanks for the suggestion, I'll do that in the next version.
> >
> > > Also the dev_err is missing a '\n' termination
> >
> > My aim in this patch was only solve style problems, but I
> > can put that missing '\n' too. Do you think it could be done
> > in the same commit or it's a better idea do it in another
> > commit and send both as a patchset?
>
> Separate commit given as you say it's not style and this one has
> enough different things in it already!
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jonathan
>
> > >