From: Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@linux.intel.com>
To: Luca Ceresoli <luca@lucaceresoli.net>
Cc: Eugen Hristev <eugen.hristev@microchip.com>,
leonl@leopardimaging.com, linux-media@vger.kernel.org,
skomatineni@nvidia.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] media: i2c: imx274: simplify probe function by adding local variable dev
Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2021 13:50:36 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YZzVjNVI3hySmC3o@paasikivi.fi.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4be771a0-9e77-64fd-031c-242dd4598996@lucaceresoli.net>
Hi Luca,
On Tue, Nov 23, 2021 at 12:35:42PM +0100, Luca Ceresoli wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 23/11/21 12:25, Sakari Ailus wrote:
> > Hi Eugen,
> >
> > On Tue, Nov 23, 2021 at 01:15:20PM +0200, Eugen Hristev wrote:
> >> Simplify probe function by adding a local variable dev instead of using
> >> &client->dev all the time.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Eugen Hristev <eugen.hristev@microchip.com>
> >
> > It's not really wrong to do this, but is it useful?
> It is of course a matter of personal taste, but I also prefer a short
> name in cases such as this where the same member is accessed a lot of
> times. To me it makes code simpler to read and even to write.
>
> > You can't even unwrap a single line, the lines are just made a little bit
> > shorter.
>
> Let's be fair, he did unwrap 4. :)
Ah, yes, you're right.
But at least one could have been wrapped without the change. :-)
>
> As said, it is a matter of taste so I'll be OK it this patch is dropped.
> But since I like it and it looks correct:
>
> Reviewed-by: Luca Ceresoli <luca@lucaceresoli.net>
--
Sakari Ailus
prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-11-23 11:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-11-23 11:15 [PATCH 1/2] media: i2c: imx274: simplify probe function by adding local variable dev Eugen Hristev
2021-11-23 11:15 ` [PATCH 2/2] media: i2c: imx274: implement fwnode parsing Eugen Hristev
2021-11-23 11:23 ` Sakari Ailus
2021-11-23 11:37 ` Eugen.Hristev
2021-11-23 11:25 ` [PATCH 1/2] media: i2c: imx274: simplify probe function by adding local variable dev Sakari Ailus
2021-11-23 11:35 ` Eugen.Hristev
2021-11-23 11:51 ` Sakari Ailus
2021-11-23 11:35 ` Luca Ceresoli
2021-11-23 11:50 ` Sakari Ailus [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=YZzVjNVI3hySmC3o@paasikivi.fi.intel.com \
--to=sakari.ailus@linux.intel.com \
--cc=eugen.hristev@microchip.com \
--cc=leonl@leopardimaging.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-media@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=luca@lucaceresoli.net \
--cc=skomatineni@nvidia.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox