From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BF26EC433EF for ; Thu, 28 Oct 2021 15:36:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A1BF6610C8 for ; Thu, 28 Oct 2021 15:36:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S230329AbhJ1Pit (ORCPT ); Thu, 28 Oct 2021 11:38:49 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:47400 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S230126AbhJ1Pis (ORCPT ); Thu, 28 Oct 2021 11:38:48 -0400 Received: from mail-ed1-x536.google.com (mail-ed1-x536.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::536]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 72BA0C061570 for ; Thu, 28 Oct 2021 08:36:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ed1-x536.google.com with SMTP id f8so4926078edy.4 for ; Thu, 28 Oct 2021 08:36:21 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=Km7RN9DuYhSgIdZd4vw5rE9R6RjCpFJ/7Jxi8UL+wpU=; b=AlM+eueZXz8t3SOmFz7G6PaqrKh/8fZ7t4ebW1BfNzZVsiSmiuBcpXUbFbzFr80EPh b3wK5Fp0Dah+Kr1sNSpyk3ND5UYWlrL/QOBud8eo4PQUE0gfQoRFuRqEgC+ZOIoJMKVD 4srzw4IwWjmkY1d/GYfmTHou9jwST8itfs7PmfHN/JidMIqJqyLQy1VyqeLduhjGFjyn 6XUaxx0+1udNHyqUeGnqhCwUy1wftttRahRagX9OMuFb4FiDStKPkPdoxEjwwkPgSmBg CCcgJHeJRZtecoilsnWiJCaQtgJ/bzROBO8Pv3XJtxy4/e3M5GVe7t7ezA0qUiXdr1Cs 3CTg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to :references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=Km7RN9DuYhSgIdZd4vw5rE9R6RjCpFJ/7Jxi8UL+wpU=; b=JYTWpwxQm8haCir+/RWU8t5VpdB2/UPWlx0yX5/N2wSF0//fZMLlU3kMQVspRXqjSE uA3oQInoBdX4hO2sOoFjfke8TNc3frODdkzGwBHHhWgI9/Gos9VNFMIZZrRIQohnw826 XxmA5Pf61L2vYFq4AD7uLqZ4sEw+U8/lSH2oC9wycmlJAkBTrS4jhYCL8qSGd2tnR80x 6J48YqgE5oH0ts60xvMyBqPL6Czn7CJb8E6CY812kAmViMJwOZCwvQ7u+XZ8VMlYsgIE p2tjWJqdMtTk7bh8wFbCFh2ZeyfJfYxTegcsZi0dX6bBjK9wVDXqUClKalkKyHzJD7Tx b+rw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530FrkxPZqyRhcssWDdCC8T/lHZ8ZJ+MifXSmCVZus3/Qjrf5/I7 k5AGpd+sLBuQq5DKRutVHRg= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJw/Yo90kJQEQRr1eUujrIVd2cC+gKKUV9sZsn77IH1geIQKq/vGEVJuhyTYNpeKCW9Gy0hPKw== X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:1848:: with SMTP id w8mr6316533eje.485.1635435379975; Thu, 28 Oct 2021 08:36:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain (host-79-56-54-101.retail.telecomitalia.it. [79.56.54.101]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id hv9sm1604735ejc.51.2021.10.28.08.36.18 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 28 Oct 2021 08:36:19 -0700 (PDT) From: "Fabio M. De Francesco" To: Julia Lawall , Karolina Drobnik Cc: outreachy-kernel@googlegroups.com, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, forest@alittletooquiet.net, linux-staging@lists.linux.dev, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [Outreachy kernel] [PATCH 5/7] staging: vt6655: Rewrite conditional in AL7320 initialization Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2021 17:36:18 +0200 Message-ID: <9038076.3kJb6oI6SG@localhost.localdomain> In-Reply-To: <6d2590b127499ba7ae1e7bc36d71064a5262659d.camel@gmail.com> References: <6d2590b127499ba7ae1e7bc36d71064a5262659d.camel@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thursday, October 28, 2021 4:35:30 PM CEST Karolina Drobnik wrote: > On Thu, 2021-10-28 at 14:36 +0200, Fabio M. De Francesco wrote: > > As far as I know by reading some Greg K-H's replies to other > > developers, this > > " ? : " style is not well accepted here. > > I thought that the expression is simple enough that it can be written > this way. Julia nicely summarised why I think it's a good usage of the > conditional operator. Still, there's no problem in changing it to "if- > else" statement if that's the preferred option. If I were you, I'd leave the patch as-is and wait for Greg review. I was only reporting some words that I recall I read in some emails of Greg. But it is highly probable that those contexts were a bit different or that the statements were much more complex. As far as what my personal preference is, I think that you shouldn't care because I'm not one of the maintainers. Above all, even if I were one of the maintainers I'd never prevent developers to use their own style with this kind of statements. To summarize, you'd better leave the patch as-is. Thanks, Fabio > > Thanks, > Karolina > > > >