Re: [PATCH] hwmon: Use min() instead of doing it manually

[Guenter Roeck]

On 12/27/21 4:18 PM, Aleksandr Mezin wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 27, 2021 at 9:43 PM Guenter Roeck <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On 12/27/21 3:36 AM, Jiapeng Chong wrote:
> > > Eliminate following coccicheck warning:
> > >
> > > ./drivers/hwmon/nzxt-smart2.c:461:12-13: WARNING opportunity for min().
> > >
> > > Reported-by: Abaci Robot <abaci@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Signed-off-by: Jiapeng Chong <jiapeng.chong@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > ---
> > >    drivers/hwmon/nzxt-smart2.c | 2 +-
> > >    1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/hwmon/nzxt-smart2.c b/drivers/hwmon/nzxt-smart2.c
> > > index 534d39b8908e..b30de7441fbb 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/hwmon/nzxt-smart2.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/hwmon/nzxt-smart2.c
> > > @@ -458,7 +458,7 @@ static int send_output_report(struct drvdata *drvdata, const void *data,
> > >
> > >        ret = hid_hw_output_report(drvdata->hid, drvdata->output_buffer,
> > >                                   sizeof(drvdata->output_buffer));
> > > -     return ret < 0 ? ret : 0;
> > > +     return min(ret, 0);
> >
> > Nack, that is just confusing. ret is an error if < 0, and min obfuscates
> > that we want to return an error or 0.
> >
> > Guenter
>
> Should I change that ternary operator to a full "if" maybe?
> Apparently, both some people and some tools read it as "min()".
No, the code is good as is, using if() doesn't really make a difference,
and I _really_ don't want to encourage people to start submitting patches
to change the other 100+ instances of the same code in the kernel.

Guenter