[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20110216161519.GA14458@ericsson.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2011 08:15:19 -0800
From: Guenter Roeck <guenter.roeck@...csson.com>
To: Clemens Ladisch <clemens@...isch.de>
CC: Jean Delvare <khali@...ux-fr.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"lm-sensors@...sensors.org" <lm-sensors@...sensors.org>
Subject: Re: [lm-sensors] [PATCH 3/3] hwmon: (jc42) do not allow writing to
locked registers
On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 10:38:38AM -0500, Clemens Ladisch wrote:
> Guenter Roeck wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 10:11:35AM -0500, Clemens Ladisch wrote:
> > > Guenter Roeck wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 08:02:38AM -0500, Clemens Ladisch wrote:
> > > > > + readonly = config & JC42_CFG_TCRIT_LOCK;
> > > >
> > > > You are assigning a non-bool to a bool. I can see that recent C compilers
> > > > do the right thing, but I am not sure if that is always the case.
> > > > So I would prefer
> > > > readonly = !!(config & JC42_CFG_TCRIT_LOCK);
> > > >
> > > > Same for the assignments below. I can make that change if you are ok with it.
> > >
> > > I cannot imagine how a compiler could get this wrong even if it tried
> > > to, but if you think so, go ahead. :)
> >
> > I don't know. Maybe I am just paranoid. Using !! is how I usually see it done.
>
> Usually, !! is used to convert non-zero to the _integer_ 1. With
> a compiler that implements bool, this conversion is already implied.
> On older compilers, someone might be tempted to do "#define bool int",
> but this is not an issue with the compilers required by Linux.
>
I looked up other drivers, and they do the same, so I'll declare it safe
and apply your patch without modification.
Thanks,
Guenter
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists