[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Y3Y6bEHCzh3yCcS4@kadam>
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2022 16:43:08 +0300
From: Dan Carpenter <error27@...il.com>
To: Umang Jain <umang.jain@...asonboard.com>
Cc: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
Broadcom internal kernel review list
<bcm-kernel-feedback-list@...adcom.com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Stefan Wahren <wahrenst@....net>,
Hans Verkuil <hverkuil-cisco@...all.nl>,
Dave Stevenson <dave.stevenson@...pberrypi.com>,
Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab+samsung@...nel.org>,
linux-rpi-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-staging@...ts.linux.dev, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
kieran.bingham@...asonboard.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] staging: vc04_services: mmal-vchiq: Do not assign
bool to u32
On Thu, Nov 17, 2022 at 06:29:52PM +0530, Umang Jain wrote:
> From: Dave Stevenson <dave.stevenson@...pberrypi.com>
>
> struct vchiq_mmal_component.enabled is a u32 type. Do not assign
> it a bool.
It's not a u32 type so this is wrong.
u32 enabled:1;
But also "true" is better than "1" in terms of a human reading the code.
Perhaps this is from a static checker? I am also the author of a checker
tool so I know how stupid they can be. When the checker says something
dumb, then the correct response is to be be briefly amused and not to
slavishly obey it.
regards,
dan
Powered by blists - more mailing lists