Hi,
On 10/15/19 7:57 AM, Simon Horman wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 14, 2019 at 11:04:28PM +0800, kbuild test robot wrote:
>> From: kbuild test robot <l...@intel.com>
>>
>> drivers/net/can/m_can/m_can.c:783:9-10: WARNING: return of 0/1 in function
>> 'is_protocol_err' with return type bool
>>
>> Return statements in functions returning bool should use
>> true/false instead of 1/0.
>> Generated by: scripts/coccinelle/misc/boolreturn.cocci
>>
>> Fixes: 46946163ac61 ("can: m_can: add support for handling arbitration
>> error")
>> CC: Pankaj Sharma <pankj.sha...@samsung.com>
>> Signed-off-by: kbuild test robot <l...@intel.com>
>> ---
>>
>> url:
>> https://github.com/0day-ci/linux/commits/Pankaj-Sharma/can-m_can-add-support-for-handling-arbitration-error/20191014-193532
>>
>> m_can.c | 4 ++--
>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> --- a/drivers/net/can/m_can/m_can.c
>> +++ b/drivers/net/can/m_can/m_can.c
>> @@ -780,9 +780,9 @@ static inline bool is_lec_err(u32 psr)
>> static inline bool is_protocol_err(u32 irqstatus)
>> {
>> if (irqstatus & IR_ERR_LEC_31X)
>> - return 1;
>> + return true;
>> else
>> - return 0;
>> + return false;
>> }
>>
>> static int m_can_handle_protocol_error(struct net_device *dev, u32
>> irqstatus)
>>
> <2c>
> Perhaps the following is a nicer way to express this (completely untested):
>
> return !!(irqstatus & IR_ERR_LEC_31X);
> </2c>
Really...., !! for bool / _Bool types? why not simply:
static inline bool is_protocol_err(u32 irqstatus)
return irqstatus & IR_ERR_LEC_31X;
}
Regards,
Jeroen
