| Message ID | 1416234719-16310-1-git-send-email-geert+renesas@glider.be |
|---|---|
| State | Accepted |
| Headers | show |
On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 11:31 PM, Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@glider.be> wrote: > It doesn't make much sense to make some (possible expensive) calls to > gpio_is_valid() first, and to ignore the result if the base number is > negative. Check for a positive base number first. Sure. Reviewed-by: Alexandre Courbot <acourbot@nvidia.com> -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-gpio" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c index 2e3d66adc6880950..bdf2020e103c7bc0 100644 --- a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c +++ b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c @@ -227,8 +227,8 @@ int gpiochip_add(struct gpio_chip *chip) unsigned id; int base = chip->base; - if ((!gpio_is_valid(base) || !gpio_is_valid(base + chip->ngpio - 1)) - && base >= 0) { + if (base >= 0 && + (!gpio_is_valid(base) || !gpio_is_valid(base + chip->ngpio - 1))) { status = -EINVAL; goto fail; }
It doesn't make much sense to make some (possible expensive) calls to gpio_is_valid() first, and to ignore the result if the base number is negative. Check for a positive base number first. Signed-off-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@glider.be> --- drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)