[PATCH 27/48] staging: rtl8723au: Rename BTDM_Coexist() to rtl8723a_BT_do_coexist()

[Jes Sorensen]

Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter at oracle.com> writes:
> On Mon, May 26, 2014 at 12:46:09PM +0200, Jes Sorensen wrote:
>> If you look at the patches, you'll notice that I made them functions
>> when there were return values, only the ones returning void were done
>> like this. If you can point out an actual problem with this approach,
>> please do so.
>
> Jes, does every single review comment have to be a fight?  I'm not
> asking you to redo things.  I've made this same review comment to
> several other people this month about adding empty do { } while(0)
> macros.

Dan,

Let me ask this another way, does every patch submission have to end up
in a nit-picking session over non-issues? I get the distinct impression
you simply want to comment just to have the last word.

I am very pleased to have real bug reports, but I have a hard time
seeing what value this report adds, rather than simply wasting the time
of developers.

> I think you are smart enough and understand about side effects.  It's
> something that perhaps people worry about too much, you are right.  I
> have done this research and we only fix maybe three of them per year in
> the entire kernel.  So they're pretty rare and perhaps not worth the
> fuss.

As I said, I took care of the non void returning functions to make sure
there were no side effects. The kernel has a presedence for allowing
this for years and unless you can show me an example of where the
construct I used can have potential side effects, I can only consider
this as unnecessary fuss.

Again, I very much appreciate actual bug reports and I do encourage you
to continue to send those!

Jes