On Fri, 2018-03-23 at 11:21 +0100, Alexandre Belloni wrote:
> On 23/03/2018 at 17:15:03 +0800, sean.w...@mediatek.com wrote:
> > From: Sean Wang <sean.w...@mediatek.com>
> >
> > Remove unnecessary parentheses due to explicit C operator precedence.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Sean Wang <sean.w...@mediatek.com>
> > ---
> > drivers/rtc/rtc-mt6397.c | 2 +-
> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/rtc/rtc-mt6397.c b/drivers/rtc/rtc-mt6397.c
> > index 0df7ccd..4411c08 100644
> > --- a/drivers/rtc/rtc-mt6397.c
> > +++ b/drivers/rtc/rtc-mt6397.c
> > @@ -106,7 +106,7 @@ static irqreturn_t mtk_rtc_irq_handler_thread(int irq,
> > void *data)
> > int ret;
> >
> > ret = regmap_read(rtc->regmap, rtc->addr_base + RTC_IRQ_STA, &irqsta);
> > - if ((ret >= 0) && (irqsta & RTC_IRQ_STA_AL)) {
> > + if (ret >= 0 && irqsta & RTC_IRQ_STA_AL) {
>
> I don't think this makes the code particularly clearer.
>
But it is still a one of check items in checkpatch
CHECK:UNNECESSARY_PARENTHESES: Unnecessary parentheses around 'ret >= 0'
#126: FILE: drivers/rtc/rtc-xxx.c:109:
+ if ((ret >= 0) && (irqsta & RTC_IRQ_STA_AL)) {
or we still want to keep it in parentheses around here?
> > rtc_update_irq(rtc->rtc_dev, 1, RTC_IRQF | RTC_AF);
> > irqen = irqsta & ~RTC_IRQ_EN_AL;
> > mutex_lock(&rtc->lock);
> > --
> > 2.7.4
> >
>
