On 2018/8/2 11:21, Bart Van Assche wrote: > On Thu, 2018-08-02 at 10:45 +ACs-0800, zhong jiang wrote: >> we should not use same check in a expression. just remove one >> of them. >> >> Signed-off-by: zhong jiang <zhongjiang+AEA-huawei.com> >> --- >> drivers/scsi/qlogicfas408.c +AHw- 3 +ACs--- >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+ACs-), 2 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/qlogicfas408.c b/drivers/scsi/qlogicfas408.c >> index 8b471a9..1409ac1 100644 >> --- a/drivers/scsi/qlogicfas408.c >> +ACsAKwAr- b/drivers/scsi/qlogicfas408.c >> +AEAAQA- -567,8 +ACs-567,7 +AEAAQA- void qlogicfas408+AF8-setup(int qbase, int id, int int+AF8-type) >> int qlogicfas408+AF8-detect(int qbase, int int+AF8-type) >> +AHs- >> REG1; >> - return (((inb(qbase +ACs- 0xe) +AF4- inb(qbase +ACs- 0xe)) == 7) +ACYAJg- >> - ((inb(qbase +ACs- 0xe) +AF4- inb(qbase +ACs- 0xe)) == 7)); >> +ACs- return (inb(qbase +ACs- 0xe) +AF4- inb(qbase +ACs- 0xe)) == 7; >> +AH0- > Does inb() have any side effects? just redundant. is it necessary for this . Maybe I miss something. Thanks, zhong jiang > Bart. > > >
