Hi Roel,
On Thu, 14 May 2009 13:29:38 +0200, Roel Kluin wrote:
> Add missing parentheses.
>
> Signed-off-by: Roel Kluin <roel.kluin at gmail.com>
> ---
> The original code looks odd, but I am not sure whether my patch is correct.
> So please review.
The original code looks good to me and your patch doesn't.
>
> diff --git a/drivers/hwmon/lm63.c b/drivers/hwmon/lm63.c
> index 3195a26..a5a511b 100644
> --- a/drivers/hwmon/lm63.c
> +++ b/drivers/hwmon/lm63.c
> @@ -219,9 +219,9 @@ static ssize_t show_pwm1(struct device *dev, struct device_attribute *dummy,
> char *buf)
> {
> struct lm63_data *data = lm63_update_device(dev);
> - return sprintf(buf, "%d\n", data->pwm1_value >= 2 * data->pwm1_freq ?
> + return sprintf(buf, "%d\n", data->pwm1_value >= 2 * (data->pwm1_freq ?
> 255 : (data->pwm1_value * 255 + data->pwm1_freq) /
> - (2 * data->pwm1_freq));
> + (2 * data->pwm1_freq)));
The correct parentheses would be:
return sprintf(buf, "%d\n", (data->pwm1_value >= 2 * data->pwm1_freq) ?
255 : ((data->pwm1_value * 255 + data->pwm1_freq) /
(2 * data->pwm1_freq)));
Which I think is equivalent to what we already have, since the ?:
operator has low precedence.
> }
>
> static ssize_t set_pwm1(struct device *dev, struct device_attribute *dummy,
--
Jean Delvare
