On Thu, Jan 16, 2025 at 10:49:44PM +0000, David Laight wrote:
> On Thu, 16 Jan 2025 17:20:19 +0000
> Colin Ian King <colin.i.king@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > The left hand size of the ? operator is always true because of the addition
> > of PCIE_STD_NUM_TLP_HEADERLOG and so dev->eetlp_prefix_max is always being
> > returned and the 0 is never returned (dead code). Fix this by adding the
> > required parentheses around the ternary operator.
> >
> > Fixes: 00048c2d5f11 ("PCI: Add TLP Prefix reading to pcie_read_tlp_log()")
> > Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King <colin.i.king@xxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > drivers/pci/pcie/tlp.c | 4 ++--
> > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/pci/pcie/tlp.c b/drivers/pci/pcie/tlp.c
> > index 9b9e348fb1a0..0860b5da837f 100644
> > --- a/drivers/pci/pcie/tlp.c
> > +++ b/drivers/pci/pcie/tlp.c
> > @@ -22,8 +22,8 @@
> > unsigned int aer_tlp_log_len(struct pci_dev *dev, u32 aercc)
> > {
> > return PCIE_STD_NUM_TLP_HEADERLOG +
> > - (aercc & PCI_ERR_CAP_PREFIX_LOG_PRESENT) ?
> > - dev->eetlp_prefix_max : 0;
> > + ((aercc & PCI_ERR_CAP_PREFIX_LOG_PRESENT) ?
>
> You can remove the extra set around the condition itself as well.
> They are a good hint the writer doesn't know their operator
> precedences :-)
Please leave them as-is... I obsolutely do not remember the operator
precedences between & and ? and I have to look it up every time I see
it.
regards,
dan carpenter
