From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Dirk Behme Subject: Re: [PATCH] gpiolib: don't compare an unsigned for >= 0 Date: Wed, 23 Sep 2015 11:41:37 +0200 Message-ID: <560273D1.4040307@gmail.com> References: <1439913752-26634-1-git-send-email-dirk.behme@gmail.com> <55E29114.4050008@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mail-wi0-f173.google.com ([209.85.212.173]:34290 "EHLO mail-wi0-f173.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752774AbbIWJlk (ORCPT ); Wed, 23 Sep 2015 05:41:40 -0400 Received: by wicfx3 with SMTP id fx3so229557496wic.1 for ; Wed, 23 Sep 2015 02:41:39 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-gpio-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org To: Alexandre Courbot , Linus Walleij Cc: "linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org" On 31.08.2015 06:44, Alexandre Courbot wrote: > On Sun, Aug 30, 2015 at 2:13 PM, Dirk Behme wrote: >> On 18.08.2015 18:02, Dirk Behme wrote: >>> >>> The parameter offset is an unsigned, so it makes no sense to compare >>> it for >= 0. Fix the compiler warning regarding this by removing this >>> comparison. >>> >>> As the macro GPIO_OFFSET_VALID is only used at this single place, simplify >>> the code by dropping the macro completely and dropping the invert, too. >>> >>> No functional change. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Dirk Behme >>> --- >>> drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c | 4 +--- >>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 3 deletions(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c >>> index bf4bd1d..9841b05 100644 >>> --- a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c >>> +++ b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c >>> @@ -47,8 +47,6 @@ >>> */ >>> DEFINE_SPINLOCK(gpio_lock); >>> >>> -#define GPIO_OFFSET_VALID(chip, offset) (offset >= 0 && offset < >>> chip->ngpio) >>> - >>> static DEFINE_MUTEX(gpio_lookup_lock); >>> static LIST_HEAD(gpio_lookup_list); >>> LIST_HEAD(gpio_chips); >>> @@ -914,7 +912,7 @@ const char *gpiochip_is_requested(struct gpio_chip >>> *chip, unsigned offset) >>> { >>> struct gpio_desc *desc; >>> >>> - if (!GPIO_OFFSET_VALID(chip, offset)) >>> + if (offset >= chip->ngpio) >>> return NULL; >>> >>> desc = &chip->desc[offset]; >> >> >> >> What do you think about this? Could this be applied? > > Looks good to me. > > Acked-by: Alexandre Courbot Ping, could this be applied, then? Best regards Dirk