Re: [PATCH] Staging: pi433: fix some warnings detected using sparse

[Elia Geretto <elia.f.geretto@gmail.com>]

On Fri, 2017-07-28 at 17:17 +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 02:56:26PM +0200, Elia Geretto wrote:
> > This patch corrects some visibility issues regarding some functions
> > and
> > solves a warning related to a non-matching union. After this patch,
> > sparse produces only one other warning regarding a bitwise
> > operator;
> > however, this behaviour seems to be intended.
> 
> I can't understand this changelog at all....  :/  What are we fixing
> exactly?  It seems like we're fixing something about bitwise
> operators...  I guess let me check the Sparse warnings...  Here they
> are
> from the latest linux-next:
> 
> drivers/staging/pi433/pi433_if.c:211:9: warning: mixing different
> enum types
> drivers/staging/pi433/pi433_if.c:211:9:     int enum
> optionOnOff  versus
> drivers/staging/pi433/pi433_if.c:211:9:     int enum packetFormat 
> drivers/staging/pi433/pi433_if.c:211:9: warning: mixing different
> enum types
> drivers/staging/pi433/pi433_if.c:211:9:     int enum
> optionOnOff  versus
> drivers/staging/pi433/pi433_if.c:211:9:     int enum packetFormat 
> drivers/staging/pi433/pi433_if.c:268:9: warning: mixing different
> enum types
> drivers/staging/pi433/pi433_if.c:268:9:     int enum
> optionOnOff  versus
> drivers/staging/pi433/pi433_if.c:268:9:     int enum packetFormat 
> drivers/staging/pi433/pi433_if.c:268:9: warning: mixing different
> enum types
> drivers/staging/pi433/pi433_if.c:268:9:     int enum
> optionOnOff  versus
> drivers/staging/pi433/pi433_if.c:268:9:     int enum packetFormat 
> drivers/staging/pi433/pi433_if.c:317:1: warning: symbol
> 'pi433_receive' was not declared. Should it be static?
> drivers/staging/pi433/pi433_if.c:467:1: warning: symbol
> 'pi433_tx_thread' was not declared. Should it be static?
> drivers/staging/pi433/pi433_if.c:1155:36: error: incompatible types
> for operation (<)
> drivers/staging/pi433/pi433_if.c:1155:36:    left side has type
> struct task_struct *tx_task_struct
> drivers/staging/pi433/pi433_if.c:1155:36:    right side has type int
> drivers/staging/pi433/rf69.c:206:17: warning: dubious: x & !y
> drivers/staging/pi433/rf69.c:436:5: warning: symbol
> 'rf69_set_bandwidth_intern' was not declared. Should it be static?
> 
> Each type of fix should be sent as a separate fix with a better
> changelog.  People have already done the "static" fixes and IS_ERR()
> fixes, so don't worry about those.  But I don't think anyway has
> fixed
> the enum issues so resend that.  Also the bitwise thing is a real
> bug,
> but there is already a fix for that, it just hasn't been merged yet.
> 
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Elia Geretto <elia.f.geretto@gmail.com>
> > ---
> >  drivers/staging/pi433/pi433_if.c | 17 +++++++++++------
> >  drivers/staging/pi433/rf69.c     |  4 +++-
> >  2 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/staging/pi433/pi433_if.c
> > b/drivers/staging/pi433/pi433_if.c
> > index d9328ce5ec1d..f8219a53ce60 100644
> > --- a/drivers/staging/pi433/pi433_if.c
> > +++ b/drivers/staging/pi433/pi433_if.c
> > @@ -208,7 +208,10 @@ rf69_set_rx_cfg(struct pi433_device *dev,
> > struct pi433_rx_cfg *rx_cfg)
> >  	{
> >  		SET_CHECKED(rf69_set_fifo_fill_condition(dev->spi, 
> > always));
> >  	}
> > -	SET_CHECKED(rf69_set_packet_format  (dev->spi, rx_cfg-
> > >enable_length_byte));
> > +	if (rx_cfg->enable_length_byte == optionOn)
> > +		SET_CHECKED(rf69_set_packet_format(dev->spi,
> > packetLengthVar));
> > +	else
> > +		SET_CHECKED(rf69_set_packet_format(dev->spi,
> > packetLengthFix));
> 
> The SET_CHECKED() macro is total garbage.  It has a hidden return and
> it calls the rf69_set_packet_format() twice on error it expands to:
> 
> 	if (rf69_set_packet_format(dev->spi, rx_cfg-
> >enable_length_byte)) < 0)
> 		return rf69_set_packet_format(dev->spi, rx_cfg-
> >enable_length_byte);
> 
> Mega turbo barf!  Kill it with fire!
> 
> regards,
> dan carpenter
> 

I will resend a separate patch containing the enum work; I apologize
for the unclear changelog, I am still trying to understand how much in
detail I should go. Next time I will be more precise.

Regards,
Elia Geretto