On Wed, Oct 02, 2019 at 12:08:49PM +0100, Colin King wrote: > From: Colin Ian King <[email protected]> > > The expression !(hw_cap & XGMAC_HWFEAT_RAVSEL) >> 10 is always zero, so > the masking operation is incorrect. Fix this by adding the missing > parentheses to correctly bind the negate operator on the entire expression. > > Addresses-Coverity: ("Operands don't affect result") > Fixes: c2b69474d63b ("net: stmmac: xgmac: Correct RAVSEL field > interpretation") > Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King <[email protected]> > --- > drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/dwxgmac2_dma.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/dwxgmac2_dma.c > b/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/dwxgmac2_dma.c > index 965cbe3e6f51..2e814aa64a5c 100644 > --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/dwxgmac2_dma.c > +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/dwxgmac2_dma.c > @@ -369,7 +369,7 @@ static void dwxgmac2_get_hw_feature(void __iomem *ioaddr, > dma_cap->eee = (hw_cap & XGMAC_HWFEAT_EEESEL) >> 13; > dma_cap->atime_stamp = (hw_cap & XGMAC_HWFEAT_TSSEL) >> 12; > dma_cap->av = (hw_cap & XGMAC_HWFEAT_AVSEL) >> 11; > - dma_cap->av &= !(hw_cap & XGMAC_HWFEAT_RAVSEL) >> 10; > + dma_cap->av &= !((hw_cap & XGMAC_HWFEAT_RAVSEL) >> 10);
There is no point to the shift at all. regards, dan carpenter
