Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH v1 06/16] rtc: mediatek: remove unnecessary parentheses | From | Sean Wang <> | Date | Sat, 24 Mar 2018 15:14:12 +0800 |
| |
On Fri, 2018-03-23 at 11:21 +0100, Alexandre Belloni wrote: > On 23/03/2018 at 17:15:03 +0800, sean.wang@mediatek.com wrote: > > From: Sean Wang <sean.wang@mediatek.com> > > > > Remove unnecessary parentheses due to explicit C operator precedence. > > > > Signed-off-by: Sean Wang <sean.wang@mediatek.com> > > --- > > drivers/rtc/rtc-mt6397.c | 2 +- > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/rtc/rtc-mt6397.c b/drivers/rtc/rtc-mt6397.c > > index 0df7ccd..4411c08 100644 > > --- a/drivers/rtc/rtc-mt6397.c > > +++ b/drivers/rtc/rtc-mt6397.c > > @@ -106,7 +106,7 @@ static irqreturn_t mtk_rtc_irq_handler_thread(int irq, void *data) > > int ret; > > > > ret = regmap_read(rtc->regmap, rtc->addr_base + RTC_IRQ_STA, &irqsta); > > - if ((ret >= 0) && (irqsta & RTC_IRQ_STA_AL)) { > > + if (ret >= 0 && irqsta & RTC_IRQ_STA_AL) { > > I don't think this makes the code particularly clearer. >
But it is still a one of check items in checkpatch
CHECK:UNNECESSARY_PARENTHESES: Unnecessary parentheses around 'ret >= 0' #126: FILE: drivers/rtc/rtc-xxx.c:109: + if ((ret >= 0) && (irqsta & RTC_IRQ_STA_AL)) {
or we still want to keep it in parentheses around here?
> > rtc_update_irq(rtc->rtc_dev, 1, RTC_IRQF | RTC_AF); > > irqen = irqsta & ~RTC_IRQ_EN_AL; > > mutex_lock(&rtc->lock); > > -- > > 2.7.4 > > >
| |