Hi Greg,
Thanks for the comment,
On 11/17/22 6:43 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
On Thu, Nov 17, 2022 at 06:29:52PM +0530, Umang Jain wrote:
From: Dave Stevenson <dave.stevenson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
struct vchiq_mmal_component.enabled is a u32 type. Do not assign
it a bool.
Fixes: 640e77466e69 ("staging: mmal-vchiq: Avoid use of bool in structures")
Signed-off-by: Dave Stevenson <dave.stevenson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Umang Jain <umang.jain@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/staging/vc04_services/vchiq-mmal/mmal-vchiq.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/staging/vc04_services/vchiq-mmal/mmal-vchiq.c b/drivers/staging/vc04_services/vchiq-mmal/mmal-vchiq.c
index cb921c94996a..17f8ceda87ca 100644
--- a/drivers/staging/vc04_services/vchiq-mmal/mmal-vchiq.c
+++ b/drivers/staging/vc04_services/vchiq-mmal/mmal-vchiq.c
@@ -1773,7 +1773,7 @@ int vchiq_mmal_component_enable(struct vchiq_mmal_instance *instance,
ret = enable_component(instance, component);
if (ret == 0)
- component->enabled = true;
+ component->enabled = 1;
Why not make enabled a bool instead?
Makes sense. It would probably require reverting the 640e77466e69
("staging: mmal-vchiq: Avoid use of bool in structures")
I'll also find other occurances in vchiq-mmal (if any). Also for other
reviewers, I found the context at:
7967656ffbfa ("coding-style: Clarify the expectations around bool")
Thanks,
uajain
thanks,
greg k-h
