Added proper error handling for register value check that
return -EPERM when register value does not meet expected condition

Signed-off-by: Zhu Jun <zhujun2@cmss.chinamobile.com>
---
 sound/soc/codecs/aw88399.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/sound/soc/codecs/aw88399.c b/sound/soc/codecs/aw88399.c
index 8dc2b8aa6832..bba59885242d 100644
--- a/sound/soc/codecs/aw88399.c
+++ b/sound/soc/codecs/aw88399.c
@@ -656,7 +656,7 @@ static int aw_dev_get_dsp_status(struct aw_device *aw_dev)
 	if (ret)
 		return ret;
 	if (!(reg_val & (~AW88399_WDT_CNT_MASK)))
-		ret = -EPERM;
+		return -EPERM;
 
 	return 0;
 }
-- 
2.17.1

How do you think about to replace the word “function” (in the summary phrase)
by parentheses?


> Added proper error handling for register value check that

  Add?
  https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst?h=v6.12-rc2#n94


> return -EPERM when register value does not meet expected condition

* It is usually preferred to end such a sentence with a dot, isn't it?

* Would you like to add any tags (like “Fixes” and “Cc”) accordingly?


…
> ---
>  sound/soc/codecs/aw88399.c | 2 +-

Please take version information better into account.

See also:
* https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst?h=v6.12-rc2#n321

* https://lore.kernel.org/all/?q=%22This+looks+like+a+new+version+of+a+previously+submitted+patch%22


Regards,
Markus

On Wed, Oct 09, 2024 at 10:43:51AM +0200, Markus Elfring wrote:
> How do you think about to replace the word “function” (in the summary phrase)
> by parentheses?

Feel free to ignore Markus, he has a long history of sending
unhelpful review comments and continues to ignore repeated requests
to stop.