Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx> writes:
> Compiling the rtlwifi drivers for ARM with gcc -Wextra warns about lots of
> incorrect code that results from 'char' being unsigned here, e.g.
>
> staging/rtl8192e/rtl8192e/r8192E_phy.c:1072:36: error: comparison is always false due to limited range of data type [-Werror=type-limits]
> staging/rtl8192e/rtl8192e/r8192E_phy.c:1104:36: error: comparison is always false due to limited range of data type [-Werror=type-limits]
> staging/rtl8192e/rtl8192e/rtl_core.c:1987:16: error: comparison is always false due to limited range of data type [-Werror=type-limits]
> staging/rtl8192e/rtl8192e/rtl_dm.c:782:37: error: comparison is always false due to limited range of data type [-Werror=type-limits]
> staging/rtl8192e/rtl819x_TSProc.c:326:14: error: comparison is always true due to limited range of data type [-Werror=type-limits]
> staging/rtl8192e/rtllib_softmac_wx.c:465:16: error: comparison is always false due to limited range of data type [-Werror=type-limits]
>
> This patch changes all uses of 'char' in this driver that refer to
> 8-bit integers to use 's8' instead, which is signed on all architectures.
>
> Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/staging/rtl8192e/rtl8192e/r8192E_dev.c | 8 ++++----
> drivers/staging/rtl8192e/rtl8192e/r8192E_phy.c | 2 +-
> drivers/staging/rtl8192e/rtl8192e/rtl_core.c | 6 +++---
> drivers/staging/rtl8192e/rtl8192e/rtl_core.h | 8 ++++----
> drivers/staging/rtl8192e/rtl819x_TSProc.c | 2 +-
> 5 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
>
Most of this looks fine to me. One issue stands out which I don't think
is right:
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/rtl8192e/rtl819x_TSProc.c b/drivers/staging/rtl8192e/rtl819x_TSProc.c
> index 2c8a526773ed..e0a2fe5e6148 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/rtl8192e/rtl819x_TSProc.c
> +++ b/drivers/staging/rtl8192e/rtl819x_TSProc.c
> @@ -323,7 +323,7 @@ bool GetTs(struct rtllib_device *ieee, struct ts_common_info **ppTS,
> if (ieee->current_network.qos_data.supported == 0) {
> UP = 0;
> } else {
> - if (!IsACValid(TID)) {
> + if (!IsACValid((s8)TID)) {
> netdev_warn(ieee->dev, "%s(): TID(%d) is not valid\n",
> __func__, TID);
> return false;
TID is a 4-bit field, it should never go negative. The cast to s8 seems
wrong to me, if anything it should be using u8. I do realize the macro
IsACValid checks against negative too, but that just looks silly to me.
Cheers,
Jes
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
