| Message ID | 92d07e90f43899981a82fbc684c3d15aaecaf591.1521794177.git.sean.wang@mediatek.com |
|---|---|
| State | Changes Requested |
| Headers | show |
| Series | Add support to MT6323 RTC and its power device | expand |
On 23/03/2018 at 17:15:03 +0800, sean.wang@mediatek.com wrote: > From: Sean Wang <sean.wang@mediatek.com> > > Remove unnecessary parentheses due to explicit C operator precedence. > > Signed-off-by: Sean Wang <sean.wang@mediatek.com> > --- > drivers/rtc/rtc-mt6397.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/rtc/rtc-mt6397.c b/drivers/rtc/rtc-mt6397.c > index 0df7ccd..4411c08 100644 > --- a/drivers/rtc/rtc-mt6397.c > +++ b/drivers/rtc/rtc-mt6397.c > @@ -106,7 +106,7 @@ static irqreturn_t mtk_rtc_irq_handler_thread(int irq, void *data) > int ret; > > ret = regmap_read(rtc->regmap, rtc->addr_base + RTC_IRQ_STA, &irqsta); > - if ((ret >= 0) && (irqsta & RTC_IRQ_STA_AL)) { > + if (ret >= 0 && irqsta & RTC_IRQ_STA_AL) { I don't think this makes the code particularly clearer. > rtc_update_irq(rtc->rtc_dev, 1, RTC_IRQF | RTC_AF); > irqen = irqsta & ~RTC_IRQ_EN_AL; > mutex_lock(&rtc->lock); > -- > 2.7.4 >
On Fri, 2018-03-23 at 11:21 +0100, Alexandre Belloni wrote: > On 23/03/2018 at 17:15:03 +0800, sean.wang@mediatek.com wrote: > > From: Sean Wang <sean.wang@mediatek.com> > > > > Remove unnecessary parentheses due to explicit C operator precedence. > > > > Signed-off-by: Sean Wang <sean.wang@mediatek.com> > > --- > > drivers/rtc/rtc-mt6397.c | 2 +- > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/rtc/rtc-mt6397.c b/drivers/rtc/rtc-mt6397.c > > index 0df7ccd..4411c08 100644 > > --- a/drivers/rtc/rtc-mt6397.c > > +++ b/drivers/rtc/rtc-mt6397.c > > @@ -106,7 +106,7 @@ static irqreturn_t mtk_rtc_irq_handler_thread(int irq, void *data) > > int ret; > > > > ret = regmap_read(rtc->regmap, rtc->addr_base + RTC_IRQ_STA, &irqsta); > > - if ((ret >= 0) && (irqsta & RTC_IRQ_STA_AL)) { > > + if (ret >= 0 && irqsta & RTC_IRQ_STA_AL) { > > I don't think this makes the code particularly clearer. > But it is still a one of check items in checkpatch CHECK:UNNECESSARY_PARENTHESES: Unnecessary parentheses around 'ret >= 0' #126: FILE: drivers/rtc/rtc-xxx.c:109: + if ((ret >= 0) && (irqsta & RTC_IRQ_STA_AL)) { or we still want to keep it in parentheses around here? > > rtc_update_irq(rtc->rtc_dev, 1, RTC_IRQF | RTC_AF); > > irqen = irqsta & ~RTC_IRQ_EN_AL; > > mutex_lock(&rtc->lock); > > -- > > 2.7.4 > > >
On 24/03/2018 at 15:14:12 +0800, Sean Wang wrote: > On Fri, 2018-03-23 at 11:21 +0100, Alexandre Belloni wrote: > > On 23/03/2018 at 17:15:03 +0800, sean.wang@mediatek.com wrote: > > > From: Sean Wang <sean.wang@mediatek.com> > > > > > > Remove unnecessary parentheses due to explicit C operator precedence. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Sean Wang <sean.wang@mediatek.com> > > > --- > > > drivers/rtc/rtc-mt6397.c | 2 +- > > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/rtc/rtc-mt6397.c b/drivers/rtc/rtc-mt6397.c > > > index 0df7ccd..4411c08 100644 > > > --- a/drivers/rtc/rtc-mt6397.c > > > +++ b/drivers/rtc/rtc-mt6397.c > > > @@ -106,7 +106,7 @@ static irqreturn_t mtk_rtc_irq_handler_thread(int irq, void *data) > > > int ret; > > > > > > ret = regmap_read(rtc->regmap, rtc->addr_base + RTC_IRQ_STA, &irqsta); > > > - if ((ret >= 0) && (irqsta & RTC_IRQ_STA_AL)) { > > > + if (ret >= 0 && irqsta & RTC_IRQ_STA_AL) { > > > > I don't think this makes the code particularly clearer. > > > > But it is still a one of check items in checkpatch > > CHECK:UNNECESSARY_PARENTHESES: Unnecessary parentheses around 'ret >= 0' > #126: FILE: drivers/rtc/rtc-xxx.c:109: > + if ((ret >= 0) && (irqsta & RTC_IRQ_STA_AL)) { > > > or we still want to keep it in parentheses around here? > Yeah, this is a matter of taste, I would keep the parentheses.
On Sat, 2018-03-24 at 19:53 +0100, Alexandre Belloni wrote: > On 24/03/2018 at 15:14:12 +0800, Sean Wang wrote: > > On Fri, 2018-03-23 at 11:21 +0100, Alexandre Belloni wrote: > > > On 23/03/2018 at 17:15:03 +0800, sean.wang@mediatek.com wrote: > > > > From: Sean Wang <sean.wang@mediatek.com> > > > > > > > > Remove unnecessary parentheses due to explicit C operator precedence. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Sean Wang <sean.wang@mediatek.com> > > > > --- > > > > drivers/rtc/rtc-mt6397.c | 2 +- > > > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/rtc/rtc-mt6397.c b/drivers/rtc/rtc-mt6397.c > > > > index 0df7ccd..4411c08 100644 > > > > --- a/drivers/rtc/rtc-mt6397.c > > > > +++ b/drivers/rtc/rtc-mt6397.c > > > > @@ -106,7 +106,7 @@ static irqreturn_t mtk_rtc_irq_handler_thread(int irq, void *data) > > > > int ret; > > > > > > > > ret = regmap_read(rtc->regmap, rtc->addr_base + RTC_IRQ_STA, &irqsta); > > > > - if ((ret >= 0) && (irqsta & RTC_IRQ_STA_AL)) { > > > > + if (ret >= 0 && irqsta & RTC_IRQ_STA_AL) { > > > > > > I don't think this makes the code particularly clearer. > > > > > > > But it is still a one of check items in checkpatch > > > > CHECK:UNNECESSARY_PARENTHESES: Unnecessary parentheses around 'ret >= 0' > > #126: FILE: drivers/rtc/rtc-xxx.c:109: > > + if ((ret >= 0) && (irqsta & RTC_IRQ_STA_AL)) { > > > > > > or we still want to keep it in parentheses around here? > > > > Yeah, this is a matter of taste, I would keep the parentheses. okay, lets keep the parentheses > >
diff --git a/drivers/rtc/rtc-mt6397.c b/drivers/rtc/rtc-mt6397.c index 0df7ccd..4411c08 100644 --- a/drivers/rtc/rtc-mt6397.c +++ b/drivers/rtc/rtc-mt6397.c @@ -106,7 +106,7 @@ static irqreturn_t mtk_rtc_irq_handler_thread(int irq, void *data) int ret; ret = regmap_read(rtc->regmap, rtc->addr_base + RTC_IRQ_STA, &irqsta); - if ((ret >= 0) && (irqsta & RTC_IRQ_STA_AL)) { + if (ret >= 0 && irqsta & RTC_IRQ_STA_AL) { rtc_update_irq(rtc->rtc_dev, 1, RTC_IRQF | RTC_AF); irqen = irqsta & ~RTC_IRQ_EN_AL; mutex_lock(&rtc->lock);