Re: [PATCH] gpiolib: don't compare an unsigned for >= 0

[Alexandre Courbot <gnurou@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Sun, Aug 30, 2015 at 2:13 PM, Dirk Behme <dirk.behme@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 18.08.2015 18:02, Dirk Behme wrote:
>>
>> The parameter offset is an unsigned, so it makes no sense to compare
>> it for >= 0. Fix the compiler warning regarding this by removing this
>> comparison.
>>
>> As the macro GPIO_OFFSET_VALID is only used at this single place, simplify
>> the code by dropping the macro completely and dropping the invert, too.
>>
>> No functional change.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Dirk Behme <dirk.behme@xxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>>   drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c | 4 +---
>>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c
>> index bf4bd1d..9841b05 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c
>> +++ b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c
>> @@ -47,8 +47,6 @@
>>    */
>>   DEFINE_SPINLOCK(gpio_lock);
>>
>> -#define GPIO_OFFSET_VALID(chip, offset) (offset >= 0 && offset <
>> chip->ngpio)
>> -
>>   static DEFINE_MUTEX(gpio_lookup_lock);
>>   static LIST_HEAD(gpio_lookup_list);
>>   LIST_HEAD(gpio_chips);
>> @@ -914,7 +912,7 @@ const char *gpiochip_is_requested(struct gpio_chip
>> *chip, unsigned offset)
>>   {
>>         struct gpio_desc *desc;
>>
>> -       if (!GPIO_OFFSET_VALID(chip, offset))
>> +       if (offset >= chip->ngpio)
>>                 return NULL;
>>
>>         desc = &chip->desc[offset];
>
>
>
> What do you think about this? Could this be applied?

Looks good to me.

Acked-by: Alexandre Courbot <acourbot@xxxxxxxxxx>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-gpio" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html