Dan Carpenter <dan.carpen...@oracle.com> writes:
> On Sun, May 25, 2014 at 10:43:27PM +0200, jes.soren...@redhat.com wrote:
>> --- a/drivers/staging/rtl8723au/include/rtl8723a_bt_intf.h
>> +++ b/drivers/staging/rtl8723au/include/rtl8723a_bt_intf.h
>> @@ -22,6 +22,7 @@
>> bool rtl8723a_BT_using_antenna_1(struct rtw_adapter *padapter);
>> bool rtl8723a_BT_enabled(struct rtw_adapter *padapter);
>> bool rtl8723a_BT_coexist(struct rtw_adapter *padapter);
>> +void rtl8723a_BT_do_coexist(struct rtw_adapter *padapter);
>> #else
>> static inline bool rtl8723a_BT_using_antenna_1(struct rtw_adapter *padapter)
>> {
>> @@ -35,6 +36,7 @@ static inline bool rtl8723a_BT_coexist(struct rtw_adapter
>> *padapter)
>> {
>> return false;
>> }
>> +#define rtl8723a_BT_do_coexist(padapter) do {} while(0)
>
> It won't matter in this case, but generally it would be better to make
> this an empty function so you don't have to worry about different side
> effects.
>
> Several other patches have the same thing.
If you look at the patches, you'll notice that I made them functions
when there were return values, only the ones returning void were done
like this. If you can point out an actual problem with this approach,
please do so.
Jes
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
de...@linuxdriverproject.org
http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
