Protect the macro parameters with parens in order to avoid priority
issues on macro evaluation when the macro argument is not a single
operand.
This is not a problem today, but it could be in the future. I found
this while reviewing a patch that introduces new callers for the
macros.
Reference: commit 04416108ccea ("drm/i915/cnl: Add registers related to voltage swing sequences.")
Cc: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@xxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Paulo Zanoni <paulo.r.zanoni@xxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_reg.h | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_reg.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_reg.h
index da2f6c623ab2..49c90e1aa796 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_reg.h
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_reg.h
@@ -1729,9 +1729,9 @@ enum i915_power_well_id {
#define CNL_PORT_TX_DW2_GRP(port) _MMIO(_CNL_PORT_TX_DW_GRP((port), 2))
#define CNL_PORT_TX_DW2_LN0(port) _MMIO(_CNL_PORT_TX_DW_LN0((port), 2))
-#define SWING_SEL_UPPER(x) ((x >> 3) << 15)
+#define SWING_SEL_UPPER(x) (((x) >> 3) << 15)
#define SWING_SEL_UPPER_MASK (1 << 15)
-#define SWING_SEL_LOWER(x) ((x & 0x7) << 11)
+#define SWING_SEL_LOWER(x) (((x) & 0x7) << 11)
#define SWING_SEL_LOWER_MASK (0x7 << 11)
#define RCOMP_SCALAR(x) ((x) << 0)
#define RCOMP_SCALAR_MASK (0xFF << 0)
--
2.14.3
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
