Instead of direct comparison, use proper ACPI macros to check error code for failures.
While at it, drop unneeded 'else' keyword. Signed-off-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevche...@linux.intel.com> --- drivers/char/ipmi/ipmi_si_platform.c | 12 ++++++------ 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/char/ipmi/ipmi_si_platform.c b/drivers/char/ipmi/ipmi_si_platform.c index 954c297b459b..023c88ea9c4c 100644 --- a/drivers/char/ipmi/ipmi_si_platform.c +++ b/drivers/char/ipmi/ipmi_si_platform.c @@ -85,18 +85,18 @@ static int acpi_gpe_irq_setup(struct si_sm_io *io) ACPI_GPE_LEVEL_TRIGGERED, &ipmi_acpi_gpe, io); - if (status != AE_OK) { + if (ACPI_FAILURE(status)) { dev_warn(io->dev, "Unable to claim ACPI GPE %d, running polled\n", io->irq); io->irq = 0; return -EINVAL; - } else { - io->irq_cleanup = acpi_gpe_irq_cleanup; - ipmi_irq_finish_setup(io); - dev_info(io->dev, "Using ACPI GPE %d\n", io->irq); - return 0; } + + io->irq_cleanup = acpi_gpe_irq_cleanup; + ipmi_irq_finish_setup(io); + dev_info(io->dev, "Using ACPI GPE %d\n", io->irq); + return 0; } #endif -- 2.30.2