Em Wed, 2 Jan 2013 17:23:50 +0530
"Lad, Prabhakar" <prabhakar.csengg@xxxxxxxxx> escreveu:
> while the effect is harmless this patch
I disagree that this is a harmless warning. It is here for a reason:
you should not be relying on the enum "magic" value, since the main
reason to use an enum is to fill/compare the enum fields only by their
names, and not by their number.
> fixes following build warning,
>
> drivers/media/platform/davinci/dm644x_ccdc.c: In function ‘validate_ccdc_param’:
> drivers/media/platform/davinci/dm644x_ccdc.c:233:32: warning: comparison between
> ‘enum ccdc_gama_width’ and ‘enum ccdc_data_size’ [-Wenum-compare]
>
> Signed-off-by: Lad, Prabhakar <prabhakar.lad@xxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/media/platform/davinci/dm644x_ccdc.c | 5 ++++-
> 1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/media/platform/davinci/dm644x_ccdc.c b/drivers/media/platform/davinci/dm644x_ccdc.c
> index ee7942b..42b473a 100644
> --- a/drivers/media/platform/davinci/dm644x_ccdc.c
> +++ b/drivers/media/platform/davinci/dm644x_ccdc.c
> @@ -228,9 +228,12 @@ static void ccdc_readregs(void)
> static int validate_ccdc_param(struct ccdc_config_params_raw *ccdcparam)
> {
> if (ccdcparam->alaw.enable) {
> + u32 gama_wd = ccdcparam->alaw.gama_wd;
> + u32 data_sz = ccdcparam->data_sz;
> +
> if ((ccdcparam->alaw.gama_wd > CCDC_GAMMA_BITS_09_0) ||
> (ccdcparam->alaw.gama_wd < CCDC_GAMMA_BITS_15_6) ||
> - (ccdcparam->alaw.gama_wd < ccdcparam->data_sz)) {
> + (gama_wd < data_sz)) {
hmm... from include/media/davinci/dm644x_ccdc.h:
enum ccdc_gama_width {
CCDC_GAMMA_BITS_15_6, // 0
CCDC_GAMMA_BITS_14_5, // 1
CCDC_GAMMA_BITS_13_4, // 2
CCDC_GAMMA_BITS_12_3, // 3
CCDC_GAMMA_BITS_11_2, // 4
CCDC_GAMMA_BITS_10_1, // 5
CCDC_GAMMA_BITS_09_0 // 6
};
enum ccdc_data_size {
CCDC_DATA_16BITS, // 0
CCDC_DATA_15BITS, // 1
CCDC_DATA_14BITS, // 2
CCDC_DATA_13BITS, // 3
CCDC_DATA_12BITS, // 4
CCDC_DATA_11BITS, // 5
CCDC_DATA_10BITS, // 6
CCDC_DATA_8BITS // 7
};
That doesn't seem right, as comparing the enum integer value won't
warrant that the number of bits of gamma. For example, gamma == 6
means 9 bits, while ccdc == 6 means 10 bits.
In any case, the code is just crappy, as one could anytime add more
values at the enum or reorder.
So, a better fix would be to have an array that would convert from the
enum "magic" number into the number of bits.
Hmm... wait a moment: why are you using an enum here at the first place???
It seems that it would be a way better to just use 2 unsigned integers:
ccdc_data_num_bits and ccdc_gama_num_bits, and just fill it with the
number of bits, instead of declaring an enum for it.
Another alternative would be to merge them into just one enum, like:
enum ccdc_bits {
CCDC_8_BITS = 8,
CCDC_9_BITS = 9,
CCDC_10_BITS = 10,
CCDC_11_BITS = 11,
CCDC_12_BITS = 12,
CCDC_13_BITS = 13,
CCDC_14_BITS = 14,
CCDC_15_BITS = 15,
CCDC_16_BITS = 16,
};
and replace all occurrences of ccdc_data_size and ccdc_gama_width by
the new enum.
This way, you could trust on compare one field with the other.
> dev_dbg(ccdc_cfg.dev, "\nInvalid data line select");
> return -1;
> }
Regards,
Mauro
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-media" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
