From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: punit.agrawal@arm.com (Punit Agrawal) Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2014 16:38:37 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] drivers: CCI: Correct use of ! and & In-Reply-To: (Olof Johansson's message of "Wed, 30 Jul 2014 23:00:24 -0700") References: <1406716655-32494-1-git-send-email-punit.agrawal@arm.com> <20140730195424.GG18384@quad.lixom.net> Message-ID: <9hhoaw55yiq.fsf@arm.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org Hi Olof, Olof Johansson writes: > Hi, > > On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 12:54 PM, Olof Johansson wrote: >> On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 11:37:35AM +0100, Punit Agrawal wrote: >>> From: Himangi Saraogi >>> >>> In commit ae91d60ba88ef0bdb1b5e9b2363bd52fc45d2af7, a bug was fixed that >>> involved converting !x & y to !(x & y). The code below shows the same >>> pattern, and thus should perhaps be fixed in the same way. >>> >>> The Coccinelle semantic patch that makes this change is as follows: >>> >>> // >>> @@ expression E1,E2; @@ >>> ( >>> !E1 & !E2 >>> | >>> - !E1 & E2 >>> + !(E1 & E2) >>> ) >>> // >>> >>> Cc: stable at vger.kernel.org >>> Signed-off-by: Himangi Saraogi >>> Acked-by: Julia Lawall >>> Acked-by: Punit Agrawal >>> --- >> >> Thanks, applied (adding a Fixes: tag, please use those in the future) Will do. > > On second look, I see that the code doesn't actually change behavior > (since the mask is done with 0x1, it happens to have the same result). > Pure luck before. :) Although I'd tested the original submission and had seen interrupts handled correctly, this fix made me question if I was mis-remembering (since this was about a year ago). I had convinced myself that the fix was required. Re-evaluating all the conditions after reading your response, I agree that it is not a change in behaviour but still a correct fix. > > Because of this, I've moved this to our next/fixes-non-critical > branch, which will be sent up during the 3.17 merge window, and I took > off the stable cc. It's still a good fix, but since it doesn't > actually fix broken behavior there's no need to rush it. Ack. Thanks a lot. > > > -Olof > > _______________________________________________ > linux-arm-kernel mailing list > linux-arm-kernel at lists.infradead.org > http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel