Re: [PATCH v3 4/5] toshiba_acpi: Remove unnecessary checks and returns in HCI/SCI functions

[Darren Hart]

> @@ -1131,14 +1055,10 @@ static int toshiba_usb_three_set(struct toshiba_acpi_dev *dev, u32 state)
>  
>  	result = sci_write(dev, SCI_USB_THREE, state);
>  	sci_close(dev);
> -	if (result == TOS_FAILURE) {
> +	if (result == TOS_FAILURE)
>  		pr_err("ACPI call to set USB 3 failed\n");
> -		return -EIO;
> -	} else if (result == TOS_NOT_SUPPORTED) {
> +	else if (result == TOS_NOT_SUPPORTED)
>  		return -ENODEV;
> -	} else if (result == TOS_INPUT_DATA_ERROR) {
> -		return -EIO;
> -	}
>  
>  	return (result == TOS_SUCCESS || result == TOS_SUCCESS2) 0 : -EIO;

Hrm... the above line cause patch application failure via git (note the
missing ? before the '0 : -EIO;'). This never existed upstream so far as
I can determine.

It applied with some fuzz manually, but I'm concerned about how this
happened.  Did you have a dirty tree when you prepared these patches
perhaps?

-- 
Darren Hart
Intel Open Source Technology Center
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/