Hi Pierre,
On 3/26/21 11:59 PM, Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote:
> cppcheck warning:
>
> sound/soc/ti/omap-mcbsp.c:379:11: style: The if condition is the same
> as the previous if condition [duplicateCondition]
>
> if (mcbsp->irq) {
> ^
> sound/soc/ti/omap-mcbsp.c:376:11: note: First condition
> if (mcbsp->irq)
> ^
> sound/soc/ti/omap-mcbsp.c:379:11: note: Second condition
> if (mcbsp->irq) {
> ^
>
> Keeping two separate tests was probably intentional for clarity, but
> since this generates warnings we might as well make cppcheck happy so
> that we have fewer warnings.
There might be other historical reasons why it ended up like this but
merging them does not make it less cleaner.
Acked-by: Peter Ujfalusi
> Signed-off-by: Pierre-Louis Bossart
> ---
> sound/soc/ti/omap-mcbsp.c | 3 +--
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/sound/soc/ti/omap-mcbsp.c b/sound/soc/ti/omap-mcbsp.c
> index 6025b30bbe77..db47981768c5 100644
> --- a/sound/soc/ti/omap-mcbsp.c
> +++ b/sound/soc/ti/omap-mcbsp.c
> @@ -373,10 +373,9 @@ static void omap_mcbsp_free(struct omap_mcbsp *mcbsp)
> MCBSP_WRITE(mcbsp, WAKEUPEN, 0);
>
> /* Disable interrupt requests */
> - if (mcbsp->irq)
> + if (mcbsp->irq) {
> MCBSP_WRITE(mcbsp, IRQEN, 0);
>
> - if (mcbsp->irq) {
> free_irq(mcbsp->irq, (void *)mcbsp);
> } else {
> free_irq(mcbsp->rx_irq, (void *)mcbsp);
>
--
Péter
