From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S1752532AbcKSGlS (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Sat, 19 Nov 2016 01:41:18 -0500
Received: from mail-qk0-f193.google.com ([209.85.220.193]:33349 "EHLO
        mail-qk0-f193.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S1750982AbcKSGlQ (ORCPT
        <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Sat, 19 Nov 2016 01:41:16 -0500
Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2016 09:41:12 +0300
From: Eugene Korenevsky <ekorenevsky@gmail.com>
To: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-usb@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5] USB hub_probe: rework ugly
 goto-into-compound-statement
Message-ID: <20161119064112.GA4582@vnote>
Mail-Followup-To: Eugene Korenevsky <ekorenevsky@gmail.com>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-usb@vger.kernel.org
References: <20161113125358.GA12417@vnote>
 <20161114065054.GB29356@kroah.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20161114065054.GB29356@kroah.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.7.1 (2016-10-04)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

> Ok, I'm going to be really pedantic here and ask that you spell this
> last statement out:
>        if (usb...)
>                 return true;
>        return false;


> 
> Also, the comment should say:
> 	/* If the first endpoint is not interrupt IN, we... */
> 

It's better to inverse the condition and return false:

```
if (!usb...)
        return false;
return true;
```

This is exactly what is said in the comment ("If the first endpoint...
we'd better punt!"). And does not break the composition of the entire
function (all `if` bodies return false, last statement is `return
true`).

-- 
Eugene