linux-kernel - Re: [Outreachy kernel] [PATCH v3 4/4] staging: rtl8723bs: core: Change a controlling expression

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.22.394.2104111150010.2854@hadrien>
Date:   Sun, 11 Apr 2021 11:51:32 +0200 (CEST)
From:   Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...ia.fr>
To:     "Fabio M. De Francesco" <fmdefrancesco@...il.com>
cc:     Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...ia.fr>,
        Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        outreachy-kernel@...glegroups.com, linux-staging@...ts.linux.dev,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [Outreachy kernel] [PATCH v3 4/4] staging: rtl8723bs: core:
 Change a controlling expression



On Sun, 11 Apr 2021, Fabio M. De Francesco wrote:

> On Sunday, April 11, 2021 11:26:41 AM CEST Julia Lawall wrote:
> > On Sun, 11 Apr 2021, Fabio M. De Francesco wrote:
> > > Change a controlling expression within an 'if' statement: don't compare
> > > with 'true'.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Fabio M. De Francesco <fmdefrancesco@...il.com>
> > > ---
> > >
> > > Changes from v2: Rewrite subject in patch 0/4; remove a patch from the
> > > series because it had already been applied (rtl8723bs: core: Remove an
> > > unused variable). Changes from v1: Fix a typo in subject of patch 1/5,
> > > add patch 5/5.>
> > >  drivers/staging/rtl8723bs/core/rtw_cmd.c | 2 +-
> > >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/staging/rtl8723bs/core/rtw_cmd.c
> > > b/drivers/staging/rtl8723bs/core/rtw_cmd.c index
> > > 32079e0f71d5..600366cb1aeb 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/staging/rtl8723bs/core/rtw_cmd.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/staging/rtl8723bs/core/rtw_cmd.c
> > > @@ -1507,7 +1507,7 @@ static void rtw_lps_change_dtim_hdl(struct
> > > adapter *padapter, u8 dtim)>
> > >  	if (pwrpriv->dtim != dtim)
> > >
> > >  		pwrpriv->dtim = dtim;
> > >
> > > -	if ((pwrpriv->fw_current_in_ps_mode == true) && (pwrpriv-
> >pwr_mode >
> > > PS_MODE_ACTIVE)) { +	if ((pwrpriv->fw_current_in_ps_mode) &&
> > > (pwrpriv->pwr_mode > PS_MODE_ACTIVE)) {
> > The parentheses in the left argument of && can be dropped as well.
> >
> What about the parentheses of the right argument? I'm not sure: does '>'
> have precedence over '&&'? Doesn't it?

On the right they are not actually needed either:

https://en.cppreference.com/w/c/language/operator_precedence

But you could look around in the code and see what people typically do.
Perhaps one might find the parentheses more clear when there is a binary
operator.  But when there is no binary operator, they could be more
confusing than useful.

julia

>
> Thanks,
>
> Fabio
> >
> > julia
> >
> > >  		u8 ps_mode = pwrpriv->pwr_mode;
> > >
> > >  		rtw_hal_set_hwreg(padapter, HW_VAR_H2C_FW_PWRMODE,
> (u8
> > >  		*)(&ps_mode));
> > >
> > > --
> > > 2.31.1
> > >
> > > --
> > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> > > Groups "outreachy-kernel" group. To unsubscribe from this group and
> > > stop receiving emails from it, send an email to
> > > outreachy-kernel+unsubscribe@...glegroups.com. To view this discussion
> > > on the web visit
> > > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/outreachy-kernel/20210411082908.3187
> > > 6-5-fmdefrancesco%40gmail.com.
>
>
>
>
>