On Thu, Mar 09, 2017 at 02:04:20PM +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 09, 2017 at 03:47:05PM +1100, Tobin C. Harding wrote:
> > Checkpatch emits CHECK: Unnecessary parentheses.
> >
> > Remove unnecessary parentheses.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Tobin C. Harding <me@xxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > drivers/staging/ks7010/ks_hostif.c | 24 ++++++++++++------------
> > 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/staging/ks7010/ks_hostif.c b/drivers/staging/ks7010/ks_hostif.c
> > index a354e34e..b75ef1d6 100644
> > --- a/drivers/staging/ks7010/ks_hostif.c
> > +++ b/drivers/staging/ks7010/ks_hostif.c
> > @@ -36,7 +36,7 @@ inline u8 get_BYTE(struct ks_wlan_private *priv)
> > {
> > u8 data;
> >
> > - data = *(priv->rxp)++;
> > + data = *priv->rxp++;
>
> Are you sure this is ok? I would have to dig out a book to find the
> ordering rules here...
I also had to get out K&R. The reason I decided to look it up and make
the change wast that with the parenthesis I also still needed to think
about the precedence. Adding the parenthesis in no way makes the
precedence *more* clear. And the checkpatch warning of course.
I ran this code to check it
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdint.h>
/*
* Confirm precedence
*/
int main(void)
{
uint8_t buf[3];
uint8_t *bp = buf;
uint8_t data;
buf[0] = 0;
buf[1] = 1;
buf[2] = 2;
printf("buf = [%d, %d, %d]\n",(int)buf[0], (int)buf[1], (int)buf[2]);
printf("bp before: %d\n", (int)*bp);
/* data = *(bp)++; */
data = *bp++;
printf("bp after: %d\n", (int)*bp);
return(0);
}
thanks,
Tobin.
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
