From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Stephen Warren Subject: Re: [PATCH] pinctrl: fix signed vs unsigned conditional inside pinmux_map_to_setting Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2012 09:52:58 -0600 Message-ID: <4F957ADA.9000203@wwwdotorg.org> References: <1335168743-3868-1-git-send-email-blogic@openwrt.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1335168743-3868-1-git-send-email-blogic-p3rKhJxN3npAfugRpC6u6w@public.gmane.org> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: devicetree-discuss-bounces+gldd-devicetree-discuss=m.gmane.org-uLR06cmDAlY/bJ5BZ2RsiQ@public.gmane.org Sender: devicetree-discuss-bounces+gldd-devicetree-discuss=m.gmane.org-uLR06cmDAlY/bJ5BZ2RsiQ@public.gmane.org To: John Crispin Cc: Dong Aisheng , devicetree-discuss-uLR06cmDAlY/bJ5BZ2RsiQ@public.gmane.org List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On 04/23/2012 02:12 AM, John Crispin wrote: > pinmux_map_to_settingi() uses setting->data.mux.func to store the return code of > pinmux_func_name_to_selector(). However, struct pinctrl_setting_mux defines the > func element as unsigned, resulting in all error codes getting lost. The > conditional following the assignment will always evaluate to false thus breaking > the error path. This makes sense. The exact same issue applies to the assignment to setting->data.mux.group just a little below. Can you fix that up too please?