Re: [PATCH] staging: pi433: Use matching enum types calling rf69_set_packet_format

Greg Kroah-Hartman
2017-07-30T17:07:04Z

On Sat, Jul 29, 2017 at 11:29:13AM +0200, Elia Geretto wrote:
> This patch fixes the following four warnings found using sparse:
>
> 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
>
> This is done calling the rf69_set_packet_format function using the
> appropriate enum for the packetFormat argument.
>
> Signed-off-by: Elia Geretto <elia.f.geretto@gmail.com>
> ---
> drivers/staging/pi433/pi433_if.c | 24 ++++++++++++++++++++++--
> 1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/pi433/pi433_if.c b/drivers/staging/pi433/pi433_if.c
> index d9328ce5ec1d..fc2250810eed 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/pi433/pi433_if.c
> +++ b/drivers/staging/pi433/pi433_if.c
> @@ -208,7 +208,17 @@ 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) {
> + int ret = rf69_set_packet_format(dev->spi, packetLengthVar);

Declare ret at the top of the function please, that will save you 2
extra blank lines (and more in the future as the horrid SET_CHECKED()
macro gets removed...)

> +
> + if (ret < 0)
> + return ret;
> + } else {
> + int ret = rf69_set_packet_format(dev->spi, packetLengthFix);
> +
> + if (ret < 0)
> + return ret;
> + }
> SET_CHECKED(rf69_set_adressFiltering(dev->spi, rx_cfg->enable_address_filtering));
> SET_CHECKED(rf69_set_crc_enable (dev->spi, rx_cfg->enable_crc));
>
> @@ -264,8 +274,18 @@ rf69_set_tx_cfg(struct pi433_device *dev, struct pi433_tx_cfg *tx_cfg)
> {
> SET_CHECKED(rf69_set_preamble_length(dev->spi, 0));
> }
> + if (tx_cfg->enable_length_byte == optionOn) {
> + int ret = rf69_set_packet_format(dev->spi, packetLengthVar);

Same here.

> +
> + if (ret < 0)
> + return ret;
> + } else {
> + int ret = rf69_set_packet_format(dev->spi, packetLengthFix);
> +
> + if (ret < 0)
> + return ret;
> + }
> SET_CHECKED(rf69_set_sync_enable (dev->spi, tx_cfg->enable_sync));
> - SET_CHECKED(rf69_set_packet_format(dev->spi, tx_cfg->enable_length_byte));

Why move the location of the check?

thanks,

greg k-h