From: Kalle Valo <kvalo@codeaurora.org>
To: kernel test robot <rong.a.chen@intel.com>
Cc: kbuild-all@lists.01.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
ath10k@lists.infradead.org, Wen Gong <wgong@codeaurora.org>
Subject: Re: drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/sdio.c:2234:2: warning: Non-boolean value returned from function returning bool
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 09:53:29 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87o8jx20w6.fsf@codeaurora.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20201116055212.GA3723@shao2-debian> (kernel test robot's message of "Mon, 16 Nov 2020 13:53:19 +0800")
+ ath10k list
kernel test robot <rong.a.chen@intel.com> writes:
> tree: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git master
> head: f01c30de86f1047e9bae1b1b1417b0ce8dcd15b1
> commit: 3c45f21af84eb05a355919abc80cf70a3a681cee ath10k: sdio: add
> firmware coredump support
> compiler: nios2-linux-gcc (GCC) 9.3.0
>
> If you fix the issue, kindly add following tag as appropriate
> Reported-by: kernel test robot <rong.a.chen@intel.com>
>
>
> cppcheck possible warnings: (new ones prefixed by >>, may not real problems)
>
>>> drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/sdio.c:2234:2: warning: Non-boolean
> value returned from function returning bool
> [returnNonBoolInBooleanFunction]
> return param & HI_OPTION_SDIO_CRASH_DUMP_ENHANCEMENT_FW;
> ^
Is this really a problem? I guess we could change that to "!!(param &
HI_OPTION_SDIO_CRASH_DUMP_ENHANCEMENT_FW)" but how is that better and
does it make any practical difference when
ath10k_sdio_is_fast_dump_supported() returns a boolean anyway?
--
https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-wireless/list/
https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/developers/documentation/submittingpatches
_______________________________________________
ath10k mailing list
ath10k@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/ath10k
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Kalle Valo <kvalo@codeaurora.org>
To: kbuild-all@lists.01.org
Subject: Re: drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/sdio.c:2234:2: warning: Non-boolean value returned from function returning bool
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 09:53:29 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87o8jx20w6.fsf@codeaurora.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20201116055212.GA3723@shao2-debian>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1189 bytes --]
+ ath10k list
kernel test robot <rong.a.chen@intel.com> writes:
> tree: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git master
> head: f01c30de86f1047e9bae1b1b1417b0ce8dcd15b1
> commit: 3c45f21af84eb05a355919abc80cf70a3a681cee ath10k: sdio: add
> firmware coredump support
> compiler: nios2-linux-gcc (GCC) 9.3.0
>
> If you fix the issue, kindly add following tag as appropriate
> Reported-by: kernel test robot <rong.a.chen@intel.com>
>
>
> cppcheck possible warnings: (new ones prefixed by >>, may not real problems)
>
>>> drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/sdio.c:2234:2: warning: Non-boolean
> value returned from function returning bool
> [returnNonBoolInBooleanFunction]
> return param & HI_OPTION_SDIO_CRASH_DUMP_ENHANCEMENT_FW;
> ^
Is this really a problem? I guess we could change that to "!!(param &
HI_OPTION_SDIO_CRASH_DUMP_ENHANCEMENT_FW)" but how is that better and
does it make any practical difference when
ath10k_sdio_is_fast_dump_supported() returns a boolean anyway?
--
https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-wireless/list/
https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/developers/documentation/submittingpatches
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Kalle Valo <kvalo@codeaurora.org>
To: kernel test robot <rong.a.chen@intel.com>
Cc: Wen Gong <wgong@codeaurora.org>,
kbuild-all@lists.01.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
ath10k@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/sdio.c:2234:2: warning: Non-boolean value returned from function returning bool
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 09:53:29 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87o8jx20w6.fsf@codeaurora.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20201116055212.GA3723@shao2-debian> (kernel test robot's message of "Mon, 16 Nov 2020 13:53:19 +0800")
+ ath10k list
kernel test robot <rong.a.chen@intel.com> writes:
> tree: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git master
> head: f01c30de86f1047e9bae1b1b1417b0ce8dcd15b1
> commit: 3c45f21af84eb05a355919abc80cf70a3a681cee ath10k: sdio: add
> firmware coredump support
> compiler: nios2-linux-gcc (GCC) 9.3.0
>
> If you fix the issue, kindly add following tag as appropriate
> Reported-by: kernel test robot <rong.a.chen@intel.com>
>
>
> cppcheck possible warnings: (new ones prefixed by >>, may not real problems)
>
>>> drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/sdio.c:2234:2: warning: Non-boolean
> value returned from function returning bool
> [returnNonBoolInBooleanFunction]
> return param & HI_OPTION_SDIO_CRASH_DUMP_ENHANCEMENT_FW;
> ^
Is this really a problem? I guess we could change that to "!!(param &
HI_OPTION_SDIO_CRASH_DUMP_ENHANCEMENT_FW)" but how is that better and
does it make any practical difference when
ath10k_sdio_is_fast_dump_supported() returns a boolean anyway?
--
https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-wireless/list/
https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/developers/documentation/submittingpatches
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-11-16 7:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-11-16 5:53 drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/sdio.c:2234:2: warning: Non-boolean value returned from function returning bool kernel test robot
2020-11-16 5:53 ` kernel test robot
2020-11-16 7:53 ` Kalle Valo [this message]
2020-11-16 7:53 ` Kalle Valo
2020-11-16 7:53 ` Kalle Valo
2020-11-16 9:33 ` Wen Gong
2020-11-16 9:33 ` Wen Gong
2020-11-16 9:33 ` Wen Gong
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2020-11-14 18:33 kernel test robot
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=87o8jx20w6.fsf@codeaurora.org \
--to=kvalo@codeaurora.org \
--cc=ath10k@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=kbuild-all@lists.01.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rong.a.chen@intel.com \
--cc=wgong@codeaurora.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.