On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 4:26 AM, Ruud Commandeur <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Assuming this is necessary, I think it then might be time to > > reorder this: > > > > if (!blkcnt) <-- possibly at the very start of the function. > > return 0; > > > > if (blkcnt == 1) > > cmd.cmdidx = MMC_CMD_WRITE_SINGLE_BLOCK; > > else > > cmd.cmdidx = MMC_CMD_WRITE_MULTIPLE_BLOCK; > > > > > > While technically correct, checking >1, then >0 creates an > > odd dissonance in my mind, and makes me have to think about > > when that if clause will evaluate to true, and I hate having > > to think. :) > > > > You're right. That was the reason for adding my (wrong styled) comments. > So I can either reorder his to: > > if (blkcnt == 0) > return 0; > else if (blkcnt == 1) > cmd.cmdidx = MMC_CMD_WRITE_SINGLE_BLOCK; > else > cmd.cmdidx = MMC_CMD_WRITE_MULTIPLE_BLOCK; > > Or add the test for 0 at the very beginning as you suggested. > Any preference? > > This looks fine to me.
_______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list [email protected] http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
