On 12/23/18 11:06 AM, Andrew Lunn wrote:
>>> + switch (attr) {
>>> + case hwmon_in_lcrit_alarm:
>>> + ret = phy_read(phydev, MII_INTSRC);
>>> + if (ret < 0)
>>> + return ret;
>>> +
>>> + *value = !!(ret & MII_INTSRC_TEMP_ERR);
>>> + return 0;
>>> + case hwmon_temp_crit_alarm:
>>> + ret = phy_read(phydev, MII_INTSRC);
>>> + if (ret < 0)
>>> + return ret;
>>> +
>>> + *value = !!(ret & MII_INTSRC_TEMP_ERR);
>>> + return 0;
>>> + default:
>>> + return -EOPNOTSUPP;
>>> + }
>>> +}
>> This looks like a copy & paste error, in both cases you're doing the same.
>
> You also should not do it like this. hwmon_temp_crit_alarm is in a
> different set of enum's as hwmon_in_lcrit_alarm. hwmon_in_lcrit_alarm
> = 14. hwmon_temp_max_alarm also is 14. You should have two different
> switch statements to take account of this.
I can also use a simple conditional, since I don't expect the number of
HWMON properties to grow, eg.
if (type == hwmon_in && attr == hwmon_in_lcrit_alarm) {...}
if (type == hwmon_temp && attr == hwmon_temp_crit_alarm) {...}
I think that's a bit more readable.
--
Best regards,
Marek Vasut
