On Sunday 15 February 2009 17:46:44 Michael Buesch wrote: > On Sunday 15 February 2009 17:37:59 Roel Kluin wrote: > > I think below is what was intended? otherwise we could as well have written: > > > > b43_radio_write16(dev, txctl_reg, > > (b43_radio_read16(dev, txctl_reg) & ~txctl_value) > > || (rfatt->with_padmix) ? txctl_value : 0); > > > > ^^--- Note: boolean or > > Uhm, no? > Can you please explain why you think this is equal? Does | have precedence over ?: Hm, | does indeed seem to have precedence over ?:. So, while I still don't understand why you think || would be equal to the current code, but expanding the paren throughout the whole ?: expression seems to be required. Note that the paren was intentionally placed like this under the assumption that ?: has precedence over |. Which seems to be wrong. > > > > > please review. > > -------------------------->8------------------8<--------------------------- > > Fix misplaced parentheses > > > > Signed-off-by: Roel Kluin <roel.kluin@xxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/b43/lo.c b/drivers/net/wireless/b43/lo.c > > index 6a18a14..88ed75f 100644 > > --- a/drivers/net/wireless/b43/lo.c > > +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/b43/lo.c > > @@ -783,7 +783,7 @@ struct b43_lo_calib * b43_calibrate_lo_setting(struct b43_wldev *dev, > > | rfatt->att); > > b43_radio_write16(dev, txctl_reg, > > (b43_radio_read16(dev, txctl_reg) & ~txctl_value) > > - | (rfatt->with_padmix) ? txctl_value : 0); > > + | (rfatt->with_padmix ? txctl_value : 0)); > > > > max_rx_gain = rfatt->att * 2; > > max_rx_gain += bbatt->att / 2; > > -- > > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in > > the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > > > > > > > -- Greetings, Michael. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
