Re: Another trivial orinoco update

[David Gibson <hermes@gibson.dropbear.id.au>]

On Wed, Nov 03, 2004 at 10:17:38PM +0100, Francois Romieu wrote:
> David Gibson <hermes@gibson.dropbear.id.au> :
> [...]
> > This patch alters the convention with which orinoco_lock() is invoked
> > in the orinoco driver.  This should cause no behavioural change, but
> > reduces meaningless diffs between the mainline and CVS version of the
> > driver.  Another small step towards a merge.
> 
> Afaics orinico_lock returns a nice status code. Let alone the merge
> argument (which could be solved in the CVS tree as well), is there a
> technical reason for this patch ?

orinoco_lock() only ever returns either 0 or -EBUSY, so it's
essentially boolean.  There's no reason to expect it would ever return
anything else.  Using it in if statements directly removes a few lines
of code, removes the need for a few extra 'err' variables, and makes
things slightly neater in the case where just propagating the -EBUSY
up isn't the right thing to do.  It's no big deal, but we did make
this change in CVS for a reason.

-- 
David Gibson			| For every complex problem there is a
david AT gibson.dropbear.id.au	| solution which is simple, neat and
				| wrong.
http://www.ozlabs.org/people/dgibson