[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170714130955.zqe26g6zpixr3xj2@mwanda>
Date: Fri, 14 Jul 2017 16:09:55 +0300
From: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Cc: devel@...verdev.osuosl.org, Hans Verkuil <hverkuil@...all.nl>,
Alan Cox <alan@...ux.intel.com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Daeseok Youn <daeseok.youn@...il.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
dri-devel <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
adi-buildroot-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net,
Linux-Renesas <linux-renesas-soc@...r.kernel.org>,
IDE-ML <linux-ide@...r.kernel.org>,
Robert Jarzmik <robert.jarzmik@...e.fr>,
Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
Niklas Söderlund
<niklas.soderlund@...natech.se>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...nel.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>,
Linux Media Mailing List <linux-media@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 14/14] [media] fix warning on v4l2_subdev_call() result
interpreted as bool
On Fri, Jul 14, 2017 at 03:55:26PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> I don't agree with it as a static analysis dev...
What I mean is if it's a macro that returns -ENODEV or a function that
returns -ENODEV, they should both be treated the same. The other
warnings this check prints are quite clever.
regards,
dan carpenter
Powered by blists - more mailing lists