On Wed, Jun 05, 2019 at 12:04:43PM +0530, Hariprasad Kelam wrote: > On Mon, Jun 03, 2019 at 09:04:57PM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 04, 2019 at 12:24:12AM +0530, Hariprasad Kelam wrote: > > > Knowing the fact that operator '|' is faster than '+'. > > > Its better we replace + with | in this case. > > > > > > Issue reported by coccicheck > > > drivers/staging/emxx_udc/emxx_udc.h:94:34-35: WARNING: sum of probable > > > bitmasks, consider | > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Hariprasad Kelam <hariprasad.kelam@xxxxxxxxx> > > > --- > > > drivers/staging/emxx_udc/emxx_udc.h | 2 +- > > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/staging/emxx_udc/emxx_udc.h b/drivers/staging/emxx_udc/emxx_udc.h > > > index b8c3dee..88d6bda 100644 > > > --- a/drivers/staging/emxx_udc/emxx_udc.h > > > +++ b/drivers/staging/emxx_udc/emxx_udc.h > > > @@ -91,7 +91,7 @@ int vbus_irq; > > > #define BIT30 0x40000000 > > > #define BIT31 0x80000000 > > > > All of those BITXX defines should be removed and the "real" BIT(X) macro > > used instead. > Yes will send separate patch to address this. > > > > > -#define TEST_FORCE_ENABLE (BIT18 + BIT16) > > > +#define TEST_FORCE_ENABLE (BIT18 | BIT16) > > > > It really doesn't matter, a good compiler will have already turned this > > into a constant value so you really do not know if this is less/faster > > code or not, right? > > > > Did you look at the output to verify this actually changed anything? > > > > thanks, > > > > greg k-h > > Ok . Treating this as false postive from coccicheck. I liked the patch. | is way more normal and readable than +. It's just the commit message was bogus. I would be very surprised if this coccicheck found anything that wasn't a compile time constant like this. regards, dan carpenter _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
