[patch 3/9] ath9k: cleanup: u32 => bool

[patch 3/9] ath9k: cleanup: u32 => bool

[Dan Carpenter]

This is used as a boolean variable so changing it to a boolean type is a
cleanup.

Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <error27@gmail.com>

diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/ar5008_phy.c b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/ar5008_phy.c
index b2c17c9..f685b8b 100644
--- a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/ar5008_phy.c
+++ b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/ar5008_phy.c
@@ -1082,7 +1082,7 @@ static bool ar5008_hw_ani_control(struct ath_hw *ah,
 		const int m2Thresh[] = { 127, 0x40 };
 		const int m2CountThr[] = { 31, 16 };
 		const int m2CountThrLow[] = { 63, 48 };
-		u32 on = param ? 1 : 0;
+		bool on = param ? 1 : 0;
 
 		REG_RMW_FIELD(ah, AR_PHY_SFCORR_LOW,
 			      AR_PHY_SFCORR_LOW_M1_THRESH_LOW,
diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/ar9003_phy.c b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/ar9003_phy.c
index 80431a2..0c34154 100644
--- a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/ar9003_phy.c
+++ b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/ar9003_phy.c
@@ -771,7 +771,7 @@ static bool ar9003_hw_ani_control(struct ath_hw *ah,
 		const int m2Thresh[] = { 127, 0x40 };
 		const int m2CountThr[] = { 31, 16 };
 		const int m2CountThrLow[] = { 63, 48 };
-		u32 on = param ? 1 : 0;
+		bool on = param ? 1 : 0;
 
 		REG_RMW_FIELD(ah, AR_PHY_SFCORR_LOW,
 			      AR_PHY_SFCORR_LOW_M1_THRESH_LOW,

Re: [patch 3/9] ath9k: cleanup: u32 => bool

[Johannes Berg]

On Sat, 2010-05-08 at 18:22 +0200, Dan Carpenter wrote:

> +		bool on = param ? 1 : 0;

umm, if you're going to use bool then use true/false too.

johannes

Re: [patch 3/9] ath9k: cleanup: u32 => bool

[Dan Carpenter]

On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 09:38:26AM +0200, Johannes Berg wrote:
> On Sat, 2010-05-08 at 18:22 +0200, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> 
> > +		bool on = param ? 1 : 0;
> 
> umm, if you're going to use bool then use true/false too.
> 
> johannes

The 1 and 0 are used as array indexes so it looks funny to use true and
false.

Let's just drop this patch.  I wrote it to silence a smatch false 
positive but I should/will just fix smatch instead.

Smatch complains we negate a non-boolean type here:

                if (!on != aniState->ofdmWeakSigDetectOff) {

It's a quite common bug to forget that negation has higher precendence 
than compare operations.  In this case, it's clear from code that "on" is
either 1 or 0 so smatch should not complain.

regards,
dan carpenter

Re: [patch 3/9] ath9k: cleanup: u32 => bool

[Pavel Roskin]

Quoting Dan Carpenter <error27@gmail.com>:

> Smatch complains we negate a non-boolean type here:
>
>                 if (!on != aniState->ofdmWeakSigDetectOff) {
>
> It's a quite common bug to forget that negation has higher precendence
> than compare operations.  In this case, it's clear from code that "on" is
> either 1 or 0 so smatch should not complain.

We could rename ofdmWeakSigDetectOff to ofdmWeakSigDetectOn and change  
the logic appropriately.  Positive logic is easier to understand in  
the long run.

ofdmWeakSigDetectOn could be boolean and "on" could be int, since it's  
an index.  The comparison could use !!on to convert int to boolean.

-- 
Regards,
Pavel Roskin