lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Jun]   [6]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: unnecessary test?


On Wed, 6 Jun 2018, Takashi Iwai wrote:

> On Wed, 06 Jun 2018 14:39:05 +0200,
> Julia Lawall wrote:
> >
> > In the file sound/pci/ctxfi/cthw20k1.c, the function daio_mgr_dao_init
> > contains:
> >
> > set_field(&ctl->spoctl, SPOCTL_OS << (idx*8),
> > ((conf >> 3) & 0x1) ? 2 : 2); /* Raw */
> >
> > Could the second argument just be 2? It's true that the preceeding call
> > contains conf >> ..., but in a more useful way, so perhaps it could be
> > useful for uniformity?
>
> I guess this is a typo of "2 : 0". The code seems toggling the
> control bit depending on the S/PDIF passthru mode. It might be
> reversed, but I bet 1 for non-audio from a common sense.
>
> Ditto for cthw20k1.c. This one is likely 1, not 2, though.

OK, should I send a patch? I have no way to test it.

julia

>
>
> thanks,
>
> Takashi
>

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-06-06 15:07    [W:0.041 / U:13.184 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site