On Wed, 2017-03-01 at 00:41 +0530, SIMRAN SINGHAL wrote:

On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 1:49 AM, SIMRAN SINGHAL
[off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 1:11 AM, Joe Perches [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

On Mon, 2017-02-27 at 23:44 +0530, simran singhal wrote:

quoted

This patch fixes the checkpatch warning that else is not generally
useful after a break or return.
This was done using Coccinelle:
@@
expression e2;
statement s1;
@@
if(e2) { ... return ...; }
-else
         s1

[]

quoted

diff --git a/drivers/staging/gdm724x/gdm_endian.c b/drivers/staging/gdm724x/gdm_endian.c

[]

quoted

@@ -26,30 +26,26 @@ __dev16 gdm_cpu_to_dev16(struct gdm_endian *ed, u16 x)
 {
      if (ed->dev_ed = ENDIANNESS_LITTLE)
              return (__force __dev16)cpu_to_le16(x);
-     else
-             return (__force __dev16)cpu_to_be16(x);
+     return (__force __dev16)cpu_to_be16(x);

again, not a checkpatch message for any of the
suggested modified hunks.

I am not getting what's the problem in removing else or may be I
am wrong you just want to say that I should change the commit message.

2 things:

1: The commit message is incorrect.
2: This form is fundamentally OK:

	if (foo)
		return bar;
	else
		return baz;


So I think this patch is not good.