Re: [PATCH v8 1/2] powerpc/rtas: Rename rtas_error_rc to rtas_generic_errno

[Nathan Lynch <nathanl@linux.ibm.com>]

Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au> writes:

> Mahesh J Salgaonkar <mahesh@linux.ibm.com> writes:
>> On 2023-08-15 13:52:14 Tue, Michael Ellerman wrote:
>>> Mahesh Salgaonkar <mahesh@linux.ibm.com> writes:
> ...
>>> > diff --git a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/rtas.h b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/rtas.h
>>> > index 3abe15ac79db1..5572a0a2f6e18 100644
>>> > --- a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/rtas.h
>>> > +++ b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/rtas.h
>>> > @@ -202,7 +202,9 @@ typedef struct {
>>> >  #define RTAS_USER_REGION_SIZE (64 * 1024)
>>> >  
>>> >  /* RTAS return status codes */
>>> > -#define RTAS_BUSY		-2    /* RTAS Busy */
>>> > +#define RTAS_HARDWARE_ERROR	(-1)  /* Hardware Error */
>>> > +#define RTAS_BUSY		(-2)  /* RTAS Busy */
>>> 
>>> Are the brackets necessary?
>>
>> During v5 changset I received offline review comment to add brackets,
>> hence continued here as well. I can take it away if Nathan is fine with
>> it.
>
> OK. I can't think of a context where the brackets are useful, but I'm
> probably just not thinking hard enough. I don't really mind adding them,
> I was just curious what the justification for them was.

It was my (mistaken) suggestion -- they're not needed.