On Sat, 12 Jan 2008 17:47:54 +0800,
Dave Young <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Minor style suggestion (same for class_find_child):
> +struct device *class_find_device(struct class *class, void *data,
> + int (*match)(struct device *, void *))
> +{
> + struct device *dev;
> + int error = 1;
How about using inverse logic here (e.g., start with int found = 0)...
> +
> + if (!class)
> + return NULL;
> +
> + down(&class->sem);
> + list_for_each_entry(dev, &class->devices, node) {
> + dev = get_device(dev);
> + if (dev) {
> + if (match(dev, data)) {
> + error = 0;
...and set found = 1 here...
> + break;
> + } else
> + put_device(dev);
> + } else
> + break;
> + }
> + up(&class->sem);
> +
> + if (error)
> + return NULL;
> + return dev;
...and do
return found ? dev : NULL;
in the end?
Especially since not finding the device is not really an error.
> +}
Otherwise this looks fine to me.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
