On Tue, Jun 27, 2017 at 9:48 AM, Jaya Durga <rjdu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Fix checkpatch.pl warning of the form "CHECK" Macro argument 'x'
> may be better as '(x)' to avoid precedence issues.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jaya Durga <ja...@cdac.in>
> ---
> drivers/staging/rtl8712/osdep_intf.h | 5 ++++-
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/rtl8712/osdep_intf.h
> b/drivers/staging/rtl8712/osdep_intf.h
> index 1985423..dac6aed 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/rtl8712/osdep_intf.h
> +++ b/drivers/staging/rtl8712/osdep_intf.h
> @@ -29,7 +29,10 @@
> #include "osdep_service.h"
> #include "drv_types.h"
>
> -#define RND4(x) ((((x) >> 2) + ((((x) & 3) == 0) ? 0 : 1)) << 2)
> +static inline unsigned int RND4(unsigned int x)
> +{
> + return (((x >> 2) + (((x & 3) == 0) ? 0 : 1)) << 2);
> +}
Looks like the checkpatch warning has already been addressed, or
checkpatch throws a false positive there.
I like this inline function better than the macro, since
RND(get_some_value());
may return funky results.
Frans
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
de...@linuxdriverproject.org
http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
