Re: [PATCH 10/34] [media] DaVinci-VPBE: Check return value of a setup_if_config() call in vpbe_set_output()

[SF Markus Elfring]

>> From: Markus Elfring <elfring@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2016 09:56:56 +0200
>>
>> * A function was called over the pointer "setup_if_config" in the data
>>   structure "venc_platform_data". But the return value was not used so far.
>>   Thus assign it to the local variable "ret" which will be checked with
>>   the next statement.
>>
>>   Fixes: 9a7f95ad1c946efdd7a7a72df27db738260a0fd8 ("[media] davinci vpbe: add dm365 VPBE display driver changes")
>>
>> * Pass a value to this function call without storing it in an intermediate
>>   variable before.
>>
>> * Delete the local variable "if_params" which became unnecessary with
>>   this refactoring.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Markus Elfring <elfring@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>>  drivers/media/platform/davinci/vpbe.c | 5 ++---
>>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/media/platform/davinci/vpbe.c b/drivers/media/platform/davinci/vpbe.c
>> index 19611a2..6e7b0df 100644
>> --- a/drivers/media/platform/davinci/vpbe.c
>> +++ b/drivers/media/platform/davinci/vpbe.c
>> @@ -227,7 +227,6 @@ static int vpbe_set_output(struct vpbe_device *vpbe_dev, int index)
>>              vpbe_current_encoder_info(vpbe_dev);
>>      struct vpbe_config *cfg = vpbe_dev->cfg;
>>      struct venc_platform_data *venc_device = vpbe_dev->venc_device;
>> -    u32 if_params;
>>      int enc_out_index;
>>      int sd_index;
>>      int ret = 0;
>> @@ -257,8 +256,8 @@ static int vpbe_set_output(struct vpbe_device *vpbe_dev, int index)
>>              goto out;
>>          }
>>
>> -        if_params = cfg->outputs[index].if_params;
>> -        venc_device->setup_if_config(if_params);
>> +        ret = venc_device->setup_if_config(cfg
>> +                           ->outputs[index].if_params);
> 
> Either keep this as one line

Will you tolerate a line length of 82 characters then?


> or keep the if_params temp variable.

My proposal was to get rid of it.


> This odd linebreak is ugly.

I am curious on how the desired changes can be integrated after a couple of update
suggestions were accepted from this patch series.

Regards,
Markus