Quoting Markus Elfring (2019-07-24 02:30:16) > I would prefer to concentrate the usage of SmPL disjunctions on changing > implementation details so that the specification of duplicate code > can be avoided. > > > > +( > > +platform_get_irq(E, ...) > > +| > > +platform_get_irq_byname(E, ...) > > +); > > Function names: > > +(platform_get_irq > +|platform_get_irq_byname > +)(E, ...); > > > > +if ( \( ret < 0 \| ret <= 0 \) ) > > Comparison operators: > > +if (ret \( < \| <= \) 0) >
Thanks. Will fold the above two in. > > > +if (ret != -EPROBE_DEFER) > > Is it appropriate to treat this error code check as optional > by the shown transformation approach? > Can this case distinction be omitted? I don't know what you mean here. Do you want me to drop this part so that EPROBE_DEFER checks don't get removed?
