Re: [media] spca500: Use common error handling code in spca500_synch310()

2017-09-22 Thread SF Markus Elfring
> No one needs to argue about keeping it the way it is. I got an other impression in this case after a bit of information was presented which seems to be contradictory. > I don't see any improvement brought by the proposed change, Do you care if the source code for an error message is present

Re: [media] spca500: Use common error handling code in spca500_synch310()

2017-09-22 Thread Joe Perches
On Fri, 2017-09-22 at 19:46 +0200, SF Markus Elfring wrote: > > > > They are both equally uninformative. > > > > > > Which identifier would you find appropriate there? > > > > error was fine. > > How do the different views fit together? Markus, please respect what others tell you because your

Re: [media] spca500: Use common error handling code in spca500_synch310()

2017-09-22 Thread Daniele Nicolodi
On 9/22/17 11:46 AM, SF Markus Elfring wrote: They are both equally uninformative. >>> >>> Which identifier would you find appropriate there? >> >> error was fine. > > How do the different views fit together? You want to change something. Changing something requires to spend energy. You

Re: [media] spca500: Use common error handling code in spca500_synch310()

2017-09-22 Thread SF Markus Elfring
>>> They are both equally uninformative. >> >> Which identifier would you find appropriate there? > > error was fine. How do the different views fit together? Regards, Markus

Re: [media] spca500: Use common error handling code in spca500_synch310()

2017-09-22 Thread SF Markus Elfring
>> return 0; >> -error: >> + >> +report_failure: >> +PERR("Set packet size: set interface error"); >> return -EBUSY; >> } > > Why change the label name? I find the suggested variant a bi better. > They are both equally uninformative. Which identifier would you find appropriate

Re: [media] spca500: Use common error handling code in spca500_synch310()

2017-09-22 Thread Julia Lawall
On Fri, 22 Sep 2017, SF Markus Elfring wrote: > >>return 0; > >> -error: > >> + > >> +report_failure: > >> + PERR("Set packet size: set interface error"); > >>return -EBUSY; > >> } > > > > Why change the label name? > > I find the suggested variant a bi better. > > > > They are both

Re: [PATCH] [media] spca500: Use common error handling code in spca500_synch310()

2017-09-22 Thread Julia Lawall
On Fri, 22 Sep 2017, SF Markus Elfring wrote: > From: Markus Elfring > Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2017 18:45:07 +0200 > > Adjust a jump target so that a bit of exception handling can be better > reused at the end of this function. > > This issue was detected by using the

[PATCH] [media] spca500: Use common error handling code in spca500_synch310()

2017-09-22 Thread SF Markus Elfring
From: Markus Elfring Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2017 18:45:07 +0200 Adjust a jump target so that a bit of exception handling can be better reused at the end of this function. This issue was detected by using the Coccinelle software. Signed-off-by: Markus Elfring