Re: [PATCH] thermal: int340x: check for sensor when PTYP is missing

[Andy Shevchenko]

On Sat, Jun 10, 2017 at 1:23 AM, Srinivas Pandruvada
<srinivas.pandruvada@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Wed, 2017-06-07 at 13:55 +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>> On Wed, Jun 7, 2017 at 2:00 AM, Srinivas Pandruvada
>> <srinivas.pandruvada@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

>> > This change checks for the presence of _TMP method and if present,
>> > then
>> > treats this device as a sensor.
>> >
>> >         status = acpi_evaluate_integer(priv->adev->handle, "PTYP",
>> >                                        NULL, &priv->type);
>> >         if (ACPI_FAILURE(status)) {
>> > -               result = -EINVAL;
>> > -               goto err;
>> >
>> > +               unsigned long long tmp;
>> You may use &priv->type as temporary variable, though I would go
>> other
>> way around:
>> declare tmp for function, then
>>
>>     unsigned long long tmp;
>> ...
>>     status = acpi_evaluate_integer(priv->adev->handle, "PTYP",  NULL,
>> &tmp);
>>     if (ACPI_FAILURE(status)) {
>>         status = acpi_evaluate_integer(priv->adev->handle, "_TMP",
>> NULL, &tmp);
>>         if (ACPI_FAILURE(status)) {
>>             result = -EINVAL;
>>             goto err;
>>         }
>>         tmp = INT3403_TYPE_SENSOR;
>>     }
>>     priv->type = tmp;
>>
> So what are we saving by doing this way?

We make priv->type assignment in one place.

That's the difference.

So, you may choose your way of course. It's not a big deal.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko