Re: [PATCH v1 1/3] HID: intel-ish-hid: Drop if block with an always false condition

On Mon, 2021-03-08 at 17:16 +0100, Jiri Kosina wrote: > On Mon, 8 Mar 2021, Srinivas Pandruvada wrote: > > > > > A remove callback is only ever called for a bound device. So > > > > there > > > > is no > > > > need to check for device or driver being NULL. > > > > > > Srinivas, any objections to

Re: [PATCH v1 1/3] HID: intel-ish-hid: Drop if block with an always false condition

On Mon, 8 Mar 2021, Srinivas Pandruvada wrote: > > > A remove callback is only ever called for a bound device. So there > > > is no > > > need to check for device or driver being NULL. > > > > Srinivas, any objections to this patchset? The cleanups look good to > > me. > Sorry, I missed this

Re: [PATCH v1 1/3] HID: intel-ish-hid: Drop if block with an always false condition

On Mon, 2021-03-08 at 11:07 +0100, Jiri Kosina wrote: > On Sat, 6 Feb 2021, Uwe Kleine-König wrote: > > > A remove callback is only ever called for a bound device. So there > > is no > > need to check for device or driver being NULL. > > Srinivas, any objections to this patchset? The cleanups

Re: [PATCH v1 1/3] HID: intel-ish-hid: Drop if block with an always false condition

On Sat, 6 Feb 2021, Uwe Kleine-König wrote: > A remove callback is only ever called for a bound device. So there is no > need to check for device or driver being NULL. Srinivas, any objections to this patchset? The cleanups look good to me. Thanks, -- Jiri Kosina SUSE Labs