1 Jul
2013
1 Jul
'13
2:56 p.m.
On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 12:21 PM, Chris Wilson chris@chris-wilson.co.uk wrote:
On Mon, Jul 01, 2013 at 07:06:32PM +0900, Seung-Woo Kim wrote:
If raw_edid is null, it will crash, so checking in bad label is meaningless.
It would be an error on part of the caller, but the defense looks sane. As the function is a bool, I would have preferred it returned true/false, but your patch is correct wrt to the rest of the function.
If we consider passing a NULL raw_edid here a caller-error, shouldn't this be a WARN on top? And I concur on the s/0/false/ bikeshed, return 0 could be misleading since for errno returning functions that reads as success. -Daniel -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation +41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch