From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jerry Hoemann Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 08/10] rtc: bd70528: Initial support for ROHM bd70528 RTC Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2019 13:26:56 -0700 Message-ID: <20190128202656.GA17466@anatevka> References: <20190125110536.GA29321@localhost.localdomain> <35bbc5b9-5f8c-ec80-3eaa-bb2c0e2812c9@roeck-us.net> Reply-To: Jerry.Hoemann@hpe.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <35bbc5b9-5f8c-ec80-3eaa-bb2c0e2812c9@roeck-us.net> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Guenter Roeck Cc: Matti Vaittinen , mazziesaccount@gmail.com, heikki.haikola@fi.rohmeurope.com, mikko.mutanen@fi.rohmeurope.com, lee.jones@linaro.org, robh+dt@kernel.org, mark.rutland@arm.com, broonie@kernel.org, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, rafael@kernel.org, mturquette@baylibre.com, sboyd@kernel.org, linus.walleij@linaro.org, bgolaszewski@baylibre.com, sre@kernel.org, lgirdwood@gmail.com, a.zummo@towertech.it, alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com, wim@linux-watchdog.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-clk@vger.kernel.org, linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, linux-rtc@vger.kernel.org, linux-watchdog@vger.kernel.org List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On Sat, Jan 26, 2019 at 08:30:24AM -0800, Guenter Roeck wrote: > On 1/25/19 3:05 AM, Matti Vaittinen wrote: > > +static int bd70528_set_wake(struct bd70528 *bd70528, > > + int enable, int *old_state) > > +{ > > + int ret; > > + unsigned int ctrl_reg; > > + > > + ret = regmap_read(bd70528->chip.regmap, BD70528_REG_WAKE_EN, &ctrl_reg); > > + if (ret) > > + return ret; > > + > > + if (old_state) { > > + if (ctrl_reg & BD70528_MASK_WAKE_EN) > > + *old_state |= BD70528_WAKE_STATE_BIT; > > + else > > + *old_state &= ~BD70528_WAKE_STATE_BIT; > > + > > + if ((!enable) == (!(*old_state & BD70528_WAKE_STATE_BIT))) > > + return 0; > > I think > if (enable == !!(*old_state & BD70528_WAKE_STATE_BIT)) > would be much better readable. Even if not, there are way too many () > in the above conditional. > The substitution is not equivalent to original. I think you mean: if (!!enable == !!(*old_state & BD70528_WAKE_STATE_BIT)) -- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Jerry Hoemann Software Engineer Hewlett Packard Enterprise -----------------------------------------------------------------------------