From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Marek Belisko Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] ASoC: pcm1681: Improve the logic for de-emphasis sampling rate selection Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2015 14:07:48 +0200 Message-ID: <55B22A94.7000802@streamunlimited.com> References: <1437664946.20606.5.camel@ingics.com> <1437665015.20606.6.camel@ingics.com> <55B1451D.2020202@streamunlimited.com> <55B1CB92.30104@streamunlimited.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from bsmtp.bon.at (bsmtp8.bon.at [213.33.87.20]) by alsa0.perex.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6527D26059B for ; Fri, 24 Jul 2015 14:07:53 +0200 (CEST) In-Reply-To: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: alsa-devel-bounces@alsa-project.org Sender: alsa-devel-bounces@alsa-project.org To: Axel Lin Cc: "alsa-devel@alsa-project.org" , Mark Brown , Liam Girdwood List-Id: alsa-devel@alsa-project.org On 07/24/2015 07:48 AM, Axel Lin wrote: > 2015-07-24 13:22 GMT+08:00 Marek Belisko : >> On 07/24/2015 03:17 AM, Axel Lin wrote: >>> 2015-07-24 3:48 GMT+08:00 Marek Belisko : >>>> Hi Axel, >>>> >>>> On 23.07.2015 17:23, Axel Lin wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Slightly improve the logic for de-emphasis sampling rate selection by >>>>> break >>>>> out the loop if the rate is matched. >>>>> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Axel Lin >>>>> --- >>>>> sound/soc/codecs/pcm1681.c | 13 +++++++++---- >>>>> 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) >>>>> >>>>> diff --git a/sound/soc/codecs/pcm1681.c b/sound/soc/codecs/pcm1681.c >>>>> index 1011142..5832523 100644 >>>>> --- a/sound/soc/codecs/pcm1681.c >>>>> +++ b/sound/soc/codecs/pcm1681.c >>>>> @@ -95,17 +95,22 @@ static int pcm1681_set_deemph(struct snd_soc_codec >>>>> *codec) >>>>> struct pcm1681_private *priv = snd_soc_codec_get_drvdata(codec); >>>>> int i = 0, val = -1, enable = 0; >>>>> >>>>> - if (priv->deemph) >>>>> - for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(pcm1681_deemph); i++) >>>>> - if (pcm1681_deemph[i] == priv->rate) >>>>> + if (priv->deemph) { >>>>> + for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(pcm1681_deemph); i++) { >>>>> + if (pcm1681_deemph[i] == priv->rate) { >>>>> val = i; >>>>> + break; >>>>> + } >>>>> + } >>>>> + } >>>> >>>> ^^^^^^^ >>>> I think we don't need those brackets only for if statement (where you add >>>> break) >>> >>> Because I think having the brackets here makes the code looks better. >> If we follow CodingStyle then it says no brackets around single statement. > > Yes, but it's not always good if the "single statement" is actually cross > multiple lines. And checkpatch does not complain this patch. > > Well, this is probably a bit personal preference because I feel it has > better readability with the brackets here. > > If you insist on removing the brackets, I can send v2 to do that. I have no strong preference about it. I'll keep it on maintainers. You can add my Acked-by: Marek Belisko > > Regards, > Axel > BR, marek