Hi Jianzheng,
On Thu, Jun 08, 2023 at 11:34:46AM +0800, Wang Jianzheng wrote:
> Remove unneeded variable and directly return 0.
>
> Signed-off-by: Wang Jianzheng <[email protected]>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/panel/panel-samsung-s6d7aa0.c | 3 +--
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/panel/panel-samsung-s6d7aa0.c
> b/drivers/gpu/drm/panel/panel-samsung-s6d7aa0.c
> index 102e1fc7ee38..fec0d014fd0e 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/panel/panel-samsung-s6d7aa0.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/panel/panel-samsung-s6d7aa0.c
> @@ -66,7 +66,6 @@ static void s6d7aa0_reset(struct s6d7aa0 *ctx)
> static int s6d7aa0_lock(struct s6d7aa0 *ctx, bool lock)
actually this function can completely made void.
> {
> struct mipi_dsi_device *dsi = ctx->dsi;
> - int ret = 0;
>
> if (lock) {
> mipi_dsi_dcs_write_seq(dsi, MCS_PASSWD1, 0xa5, 0xa5);
> @@ -80,7 +79,7 @@ static int s6d7aa0_lock(struct s6d7aa0 *ctx, bool lock)
> mipi_dsi_dcs_write_seq(dsi, MCS_PASSWD3, 0xa5, 0xa5);
> }
>
> - return ret;
> + return 0;
Anyway the patch is fine:
Reviewed-by: Andi Shyti <[email protected]>
Andi
> }
>
> static int s6d7aa0_on(struct s6d7aa0 *ctx)
> --
> 2.39.0
