Re: [PATCH v3] iio: light: opt3001: split opt3001_get_processed() logic

[Jonathan Cameron]

> 
> > > +	if (ret < 0) {
> > > +		dev_err(dev, "failed to write register %02x\n",
> > > +			OPT3001_LOW_LIMIT);
> > > +		return ret;
> > >  	}
> > >  
> > > +	return 0;    
> > 
> > Also can be simply
> > 
> > 	return ret;
> > 
> > in both branches.  
> 
> Yeah, I agonized over this since I did the change you describe in a
> different patchset, and I was advised to do it the way as I did in
> this patch so that it's more readable (i.e. we know which path is
> the successful one). I'm really indifferent to either change and it
> doesn't cut that many lines.
> 

This one is a case that tends to split reviewers.  I don't personally
care much either way because as you say the code saving is minor (but
good) vs it is a tiny bit fiddlier to read.

So far as I'm concerned either is fine.  Andy asked though so go
with that :)

J