On 11/10/2016 04:21 PM, Handrigan, Paul wrote:
>
>
> On 11/10/16, 6:54 AM, "Dan Carpenter" <dan.carpenter@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> Hello Paul Handrigan,
>>
>> The patch c1124c09e103: "ASoC: cs35l34: Initial commit of the cs35l34
>> CODEC driver." from Oct 12, 2016, leads to the following static
>> checker warning:
>>
>> sound/soc/codecs/cs35l34.c:613 cs35l34_dai_set_sysclk()
>> warn: odd binop '0xffffffffffffffef & 0x0'
>>
>> sound/soc/codecs/cs35l34.c
>> 604 static int cs35l34_dai_set_sysclk(struct snd_soc_dai *dai,
>> 605 int clk_id, unsigned int freq,
>> int dir)
>> 606 {
>> 607 struct snd_soc_codec *codec = dai->codec;
>> 608 struct cs35l34_private *cs35l34 =
>> snd_soc_codec_get_drvdata(codec);
>> 609 unsigned int value;
>> 610
>> 611 switch (freq) {
>> 612 case CS35L34_MCLK_5644:
>> 613 value = ~CS35L34_MCLK_DIV &
>> CS35L34_MCLK_RATE_5P6448;
>>
>> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>> This is zero. Maybe intentional? If so just send a reply to this email
>> and I won't bother you again.
> This is ok.
It is still a slightly unusual way to write this. And I can see why it'd
confuse both humans as well as static checkers. Usually if you don't want to
set a bit in a bitmask you just leave it out.
_______________________________________________
Alsa-devel mailing list
Alsa-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://mailman.alsa-project.org/mailman/listinfo/alsa-devel
