RE: [PATCH v5 4/5] typec: tcpm: Represent source supply through power_supply

[Adam Thomson]

On 22 March 2018 04:09, Guenter Roeck wrote:

> > +static int tcpm_psy_set_prop(struct power_supply *psy,
> > +			     enum power_supply_property psp,
> > +			     const union power_supply_propval *val)
> > +{
> > +	struct tcpm_port *port = power_supply_get_drvdata(psy);
> > +	int ret = 0;
> > +
> > +	switch (psp) {
> > +	case POWER_SUPPLY_PROP_ONLINE:
> > +		ret = tcpm_psy_set_online(port, val);
> > +		break;
> > +	case POWER_SUPPLY_PROP_VOLTAGE_NOW:
> > +		if ((val->intval < (port->pps_data.min_volt * 1000)) ||
> > +		    (val->intval > (port->pps_data.max_volt * 1000)))
> > +			ret = -EINVAL;
> > +		else
> > +			ret = tcpm_pps_set_out_volt(port, (val->intval / 1000));
> > +		break;
> > +	case POWER_SUPPLY_PROP_CURRENT_NOW:
> > +		if (val->intval > (port->pps_data.max_curr * 1000))
> > +			ret = -EINVAL;
> > +		else
> > +			ret = tcpm_pps_set_op_curr(port, (val->intval / 1000));
> 
> I am really not a friend of excessive ( ).

Yes, I got that. :) I am of the opinion that they should be used to enforce
precedence. This to me is good coding practice and makes it unambiguous for the
reader. That's why I use them as above. Do you think the above uses make it
harder to understand or more difficult to maintain?