From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail.linuxfoundation.org ([140.211.169.12]:43606 "EHLO mail.linuxfoundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751252AbdAXIDG (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Jan 2017 03:03:06 -0500 From: Greg Kroah-Hartman To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman , stable@vger.kernel.org, Arnd Bergmann , Daniel Lezcano , Linus Walleij Subject: [PATCH 4.9 096/130] ARM: ux500: fix prcmu_is_cpu_in_wfi() calculation Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2017 08:55:36 +0100 Message-Id: <20170124075538.871630752@linuxfoundation.org> In-Reply-To: <20170124075534.905042535@linuxfoundation.org> References: <20170124075534.905042535@linuxfoundation.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: stable-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: 4.9-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know. ------------------ From: Arnd Bergmann commit f0e8faa7a5e894b0fc99d24be1b18685a92ea466 upstream. This function clearly never worked and always returns true, as pointed out by gcc-7: arch/arm/mach-ux500/pm.c: In function 'prcmu_is_cpu_in_wfi': arch/arm/mach-ux500/pm.c:137:212: error: ?: using integer constants in boolean context, the expression will always evaluate to 'true' [-Werror=int-in-bool-context] With the added braces, the condition actually makes sense. Fixes: 34fe6f107eab ("mfd : Check if the other db8500 core is in WFI") Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann Acked-by: Daniel Lezcano Signed-off-by: Linus Walleij Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman --- arch/arm/mach-ux500/pm.c | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) --- a/arch/arm/mach-ux500/pm.c +++ b/arch/arm/mach-ux500/pm.c @@ -134,8 +134,8 @@ bool prcmu_pending_irq(void) */ bool prcmu_is_cpu_in_wfi(int cpu) { - return readl(PRCM_ARM_WFI_STANDBY) & cpu ? PRCM_ARM_WFI_STANDBY_WFI1 : - PRCM_ARM_WFI_STANDBY_WFI0; + return readl(PRCM_ARM_WFI_STANDBY) & + (cpu ? PRCM_ARM_WFI_STANDBY_WFI1 : PRCM_ARM_WFI_STANDBY_WFI0); } /*