On Thu, Aug 01, 2019 at 07:22:13PM +0000, Matt Sickler wrote: > >-----Original Message----- > >From: devel <driverdev-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> On Behalf Of Greg KH > >Sent: Thursday, August 01, 2019 11:35 AM > >To: Harsh Jain <harshjain32@xxxxxxxxx> > >Cc: devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > >Subject: Re: [PATCH] staging:kpc2000:Fix dubious x | !y sparse warning > > > >On Thu, Aug 01, 2019 at 12:06:06AM +0530, Harsh Jain wrote: > >> Bitwise OR(|) operation with 0 always yield same result. > >> It fixes dubious x | !y sparse warning. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Harsh Jain <harshjain32@xxxxxxxxx> > >> --- > >> drivers/staging/kpc2000/kpc2000_i2c.c | 16 +--------------- > >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 15 deletions(-) > >> > >> diff --git a/drivers/staging/kpc2000/kpc2000_i2c.c b/drivers/staging/kpc2000/kpc2000_i2c.c > >> index b108da4..5f027d7c 100644 > >> --- a/drivers/staging/kpc2000/kpc2000_i2c.c > >> +++ b/drivers/staging/kpc2000/kpc2000_i2c.c > >> @@ -536,29 +536,15 @@ static u32 i801_func(struct i2c_adapter *adapter) > >> > >> u32 f = > >> I2C_FUNC_I2C | /* 0x00000001 (I enabled this one) */ > >> - !I2C_FUNC_10BIT_ADDR | /* 0x00000002 */ > >> - !I2C_FUNC_PROTOCOL_MANGLING | /* 0x00000004 */ > >> ((priv->features & FEATURE_SMBUS_PEC) ? I2C_FUNC_SMBUS_PEC : 0) | /* 0x00000008 */ > >> - !I2C_FUNC_SMBUS_BLOCK_PROC_CALL | /* 0x00008000 */ > >> I2C_FUNC_SMBUS_QUICK | /* 0x00010000 */ > >> - !I2C_FUNC_SMBUS_READ_BYTE | /* 0x00020000 */ > >> - !I2C_FUNC_SMBUS_WRITE_BYTE | /* 0x00040000 */ > >> - !I2C_FUNC_SMBUS_READ_BYTE_DATA | /* 0x00080000 */ > >> - !I2C_FUNC_SMBUS_WRITE_BYTE_DATA | /* 0x00100000 */ > >> - !I2C_FUNC_SMBUS_READ_WORD_DATA | /* 0x00200000 */ > >> - !I2C_FUNC_SMBUS_WRITE_WORD_DATA | /* 0x00400000 */ > >> - !I2C_FUNC_SMBUS_PROC_CALL | /* 0x00800000 */ > >> - !I2C_FUNC_SMBUS_READ_BLOCK_DATA | /* 0x01000000 */ > >> - !I2C_FUNC_SMBUS_WRITE_BLOCK_DATA | /* 0x02000000 */ > > > >This is ok, it is showing you that these bits are explicitly being not > >set. Which is good, now you can go through the list and see that all > >are accounted for. > > > >So I think this should stay as-is, thanks. > > I was going to say the same thing, but I didn't know what the kernel style guideline was. > Would Linus prefer this style or would commenting them out be preferred? > Seems like the sparse warnings means the current style is not acceptable? > Sparse is just warning that you really are not doing anything here, in case you think you are, as it's a common pattern for bugs. So all should be fine, don't worry about it for now. thanks, greg k-h _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
