* [PATCH] cpufreq: nforce2: Remove meaningless return
@ 2018-11-30 14:25 Yangtao Li
2018-12-03 9:13 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Yangtao Li @ 2018-11-30 14:25 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: rjw, viresh.kumar; +Cc: linux-pm, linux-kernel, Yangtao Li
In a function whose return type is void, returning on the last line is
not required.So remove it.Also move the module declaration to the end.
Signed-off-by: Yangtao Li <tiny.windzz@gmail.com>
---
drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-nforce2.c | 11 ++++-------
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-nforce2.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-nforce2.c
index dbf82f36d270..ccff1f2a7c25 100644
--- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-nforce2.c
+++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-nforce2.c
@@ -47,10 +47,6 @@ static int fid;
static int min_fsb;
static int max_fsb;
-MODULE_AUTHOR("Sebastian Witt <se.witt@gmx.net>");
-MODULE_DESCRIPTION("nForce2 FSB changing cpufreq driver");
-MODULE_LICENSE("GPL");
-
module_param(fid, int, 0444);
module_param(min_fsb, int, 0444);
@@ -123,8 +119,6 @@ static void nforce2_write_pll(int pll)
/* Now write the value in all 64 registers */
for (temp = 0; temp <= 0x3f; temp++)
pci_write_config_dword(nforce2_dev, NFORCE2_PLLREG, pll);
-
- return;
}
/**
@@ -436,6 +430,9 @@ static void __exit nforce2_exit(void)
cpufreq_unregister_driver(&nforce2_driver);
}
+MODULE_AUTHOR("Sebastian Witt <se.witt@gmx.net>");
+MODULE_DESCRIPTION("nForce2 FSB changing cpufreq driver");
+MODULE_LICENSE("GPL");
+
module_init(nforce2_init);
module_exit(nforce2_exit);
-
--
2.17.0
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: nforce2: Remove meaningless return
2018-11-30 14:25 [PATCH] cpufreq: nforce2: Remove meaningless return Yangtao Li
@ 2018-12-03 9:13 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2018-12-04 1:16 ` Frank Lee
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Rafael J. Wysocki @ 2018-12-03 9:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: tiny.windzz
Cc: Rafael J. Wysocki, Viresh Kumar, Linux PM,
Linux Kernel Mailing List
On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 3:26 PM Yangtao Li <tiny.windzz@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> In a function whose return type is void, returning on the last line is
> not required.So remove it.Also move the module declaration to the end.
The last piece is not reflected by the subject.
Also, why do you move the MODULE_ stuff around at all?
>
> Signed-off-by: Yangtao Li <tiny.windzz@gmail.com>
> ---
> drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-nforce2.c | 11 ++++-------
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-nforce2.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-nforce2.c
> index dbf82f36d270..ccff1f2a7c25 100644
> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-nforce2.c
> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-nforce2.c
> @@ -47,10 +47,6 @@ static int fid;
> static int min_fsb;
> static int max_fsb;
>
> -MODULE_AUTHOR("Sebastian Witt <se.witt@gmx.net>");
> -MODULE_DESCRIPTION("nForce2 FSB changing cpufreq driver");
> -MODULE_LICENSE("GPL");
> -
> module_param(fid, int, 0444);
> module_param(min_fsb, int, 0444);
>
> @@ -123,8 +119,6 @@ static void nforce2_write_pll(int pll)
> /* Now write the value in all 64 registers */
> for (temp = 0; temp <= 0x3f; temp++)
> pci_write_config_dword(nforce2_dev, NFORCE2_PLLREG, pll);
> -
> - return;
> }
>
> /**
> @@ -436,6 +430,9 @@ static void __exit nforce2_exit(void)
> cpufreq_unregister_driver(&nforce2_driver);
> }
>
> +MODULE_AUTHOR("Sebastian Witt <se.witt@gmx.net>");
> +MODULE_DESCRIPTION("nForce2 FSB changing cpufreq driver");
> +MODULE_LICENSE("GPL");
> +
> module_init(nforce2_init);
> module_exit(nforce2_exit);
> -
> --
> 2.17.0
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: nforce2: Remove meaningless return
2018-12-03 9:13 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
@ 2018-12-04 1:16 ` Frank Lee
2018-12-04 8:46 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Frank Lee @ 2018-12-04 1:16 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: rafael; +Cc: rjw, Viresh Kumar, linux-pm, linux-kernel
On Mon, Dec 3, 2018 at 5:14 PM Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 3:26 PM Yangtao Li <tiny.windzz@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > In a function whose return type is void, returning on the last line is
> > not required.So remove it.Also move the module declaration to the end.
>
> The last piece is not reflected by the subject.
>
> Also, why do you move the MODULE_ stuff around at all?
When writing a driver, in most cases MODULE_ are put to the end.
Why not modify this? it is more in line with the habits of most people.
Yours,
Yangtao
>
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Yangtao Li <tiny.windzz@gmail.com>
> > ---
> > drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-nforce2.c | 11 ++++-------
> > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-nforce2.c b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-nforce2.c
> > index dbf82f36d270..ccff1f2a7c25 100644
> > --- a/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-nforce2.c
> > +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-nforce2.c
> > @@ -47,10 +47,6 @@ static int fid;
> > static int min_fsb;
> > static int max_fsb;
> >
> > -MODULE_AUTHOR("Sebastian Witt <se.witt@gmx.net>");
> > -MODULE_DESCRIPTION("nForce2 FSB changing cpufreq driver");
> > -MODULE_LICENSE("GPL");
> > -
> > module_param(fid, int, 0444);
> > module_param(min_fsb, int, 0444);
> >
> > @@ -123,8 +119,6 @@ static void nforce2_write_pll(int pll)
> > /* Now write the value in all 64 registers */
> > for (temp = 0; temp <= 0x3f; temp++)
> > pci_write_config_dword(nforce2_dev, NFORCE2_PLLREG, pll);
> > -
> > - return;
> > }
> >
> > /**
> > @@ -436,6 +430,9 @@ static void __exit nforce2_exit(void)
> > cpufreq_unregister_driver(&nforce2_driver);
> > }
> >
> > +MODULE_AUTHOR("Sebastian Witt <se.witt@gmx.net>");
> > +MODULE_DESCRIPTION("nForce2 FSB changing cpufreq driver");
> > +MODULE_LICENSE("GPL");
> > +
> > module_init(nforce2_init);
> > module_exit(nforce2_exit);
> > -
> > --
> > 2.17.0
> >
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: nforce2: Remove meaningless return
2018-12-04 1:16 ` Frank Lee
@ 2018-12-04 8:46 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2018-12-04 17:03 ` Frank Lee
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Rafael J. Wysocki @ 2018-12-04 8:46 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: tiny.windzz
Cc: Rafael J. Wysocki, Rafael J. Wysocki, Viresh Kumar, Linux PM,
Linux Kernel Mailing List
On Tue, Dec 4, 2018 at 2:15 AM Frank Lee <tiny.windzz@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Dec 3, 2018 at 5:14 PM Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael@kernel.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 3:26 PM Yangtao Li <tiny.windzz@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > In a function whose return type is void, returning on the last line is
> > > not required.So remove it.Also move the module declaration to the end.
> >
> > The last piece is not reflected by the subject.
> >
> > Also, why do you move the MODULE_ stuff around at all?
> When writing a driver, in most cases MODULE_ are put to the end.
> Why not modify this? it is more in line with the habits of most people.
If you write a new driver, then yes.
But why do you want to modify existing drivers this way? What value
do you see in those changes, exactly?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: nforce2: Remove meaningless return
2018-12-04 8:46 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
@ 2018-12-04 17:03 ` Frank Lee
0 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Frank Lee @ 2018-12-04 17:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: rafael; +Cc: rjw, Viresh Kumar, linux-pm, linux-kernel
On Tue, Dec 4, 2018 at 4:46 PM Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Dec 4, 2018 at 2:15 AM Frank Lee <tiny.windzz@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Dec 3, 2018 at 5:14 PM Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael@kernel.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 3:26 PM Yangtao Li <tiny.windzz@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > In a function whose return type is void, returning on the last line is
> > > > not required.So remove it.Also move the module declaration to the end.
> > >
> > > The last piece is not reflected by the subject.
> > >
> > > Also, why do you move the MODULE_ stuff around at all?
> > When writing a driver, in most cases MODULE_ are put to the end.
> > Why not modify this? it is more in line with the habits of most people.
>
> If you write a new driver, then yes.
>
> But why do you want to modify existing drivers this way? What value
> do you see in those changes, exactly?
OK.I'll update this.
MBR,
Yangtao
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2018-12-04 17:04 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2018-11-30 14:25 [PATCH] cpufreq: nforce2: Remove meaningless return Yangtao Li
2018-12-03 9:13 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2018-12-04 1:16 ` Frank Lee
2018-12-04 8:46 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2018-12-04 17:03 ` Frank Lee
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox