Hi Riccardo,
thanks for the patch
On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 10:44:12PM +0100, Riccardo Schirone wrote:
> Fix "Comparisons should place the constant on the right side of the
> test" issue.
>
> Signed-off-by: Riccardo Schirone <sirmy15@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/staging/media/atomisp/i2c/ov5693/atomisp-ov5693.c | 10 +++++-----
> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/media/atomisp/i2c/ov5693/atomisp-ov5693.c b/drivers/staging/media/atomisp/i2c/ov5693/atomisp-ov5693.c
> index ecd607b7b005..4eeb478ae84b 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/media/atomisp/i2c/ov5693/atomisp-ov5693.c
> +++ b/drivers/staging/media/atomisp/i2c/ov5693/atomisp-ov5693.c
> @@ -764,7 +764,7 @@ static int __ov5693_otp_read(struct v4l2_subdev *sd, u8 *buf)
> //pr_debug("BANK[%2d] %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x\n", i, *b, *(b+1), *(b+2), *(b+3), *(b+4), *(b+5), *(b+6), *(b+7), *(b+8), *(b+9), *(b+10), *(b+11), *(b+12), *(b+13), *(b+14), *(b+15));
>
> //Intel OTP map, try to read 320byts first.
> - if (21 == i) {
> + if (i == 21) {
> if ((*b) == 0) {
> dev->otp_size = 320;
> break;
> @@ -772,7 +772,7 @@ static int __ov5693_otp_read(struct v4l2_subdev *sd, u8 *buf)
> b = buf;
> continue;
> }
> - } else if (24 == i) { //if the first 320bytes data doesn't not exist, try to read the next 32bytes data.
> + } else if (i == 24) { //if the first 320bytes data doesn't not exist, try to read the next 32bytes data.
> if ((*b) == 0) {
> dev->otp_size = 32;
> break;
> @@ -780,7 +780,7 @@ static int __ov5693_otp_read(struct v4l2_subdev *sd, u8 *buf)
> b = buf;
> continue;
> }
> - } else if (27 == i) { //if the prvious 32bytes data doesn't exist, try to read the next 32bytes data again.
> + } else if (i == 27) { //if the prvious 32bytes data doesn't exist, try to read the next 32bytes data again.
I wonder why checkpatch does not complain about these C++ style
comments clearly exceeding 80 columns...
> if ((*b) == 0) {
> dev->otp_size = 32;
> break;
> @@ -1351,7 +1351,7 @@ static int __power_up(struct v4l2_subdev *sd)
> struct i2c_client *client = v4l2_get_subdevdata(sd);
> int ret;
>
> - if (NULL == dev->platform_data) {
> + if (!dev->platform_data) {
Please mention in changelog that you're also substituting a comparison to
NULL with this.
Checkpatch points this out, didn't it?
Thanks
j
> dev_err(&client->dev,
> "no camera_sensor_platform_data");
> return -ENODEV;
> @@ -1399,7 +1399,7 @@ static int power_down(struct v4l2_subdev *sd)
> int ret = 0;
>
> dev->focus = OV5693_INVALID_CONFIG;
> - if (NULL == dev->platform_data) {
> + if (!dev->platform_data) {
> dev_err(&client->dev,
> "no camera_sensor_platform_data");
> return -ENODEV;
> --
> 2.14.3
>
