From: Mateusz Polchlopek <mateusz.polchlo...@intel.com>
Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2024 13:04:29 +0200
>
>
> On 7/30/2024 3:40 PM, Alexander Lobakin wrote:
>> From: Mateusz Polchlopek <mateusz.polchlo...@intel.com>
>> Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2024 05:15:01 -0400
[...]
>>> +bool iavf_ptp_cap_supported(struct iavf_adapter *adapter, u32 cap)
>>> +{
>>> + if (!PTP_ALLOWED(adapter))
>>> + return false;
>>> +
>>> + /* Only return true if every bit in cap is set in hw_caps.caps */
>>> + return (adapter->ptp.hw_caps.caps & cap) == cap;
>>
>> Aren't these parenthesis redundant?
>>
>
> I think they are not. They wrap bit operation and also I checked it
> with checkpatch script and it doesn't complain about reduntant
> parenthesis.
If the object code doesn't change when compiling without them, there are
no compiler complains etc, then they are :D checkpatch doesn't always
catch things, but I don't remember whether the compiler won't complain
or change the object code / logic. Could you please check?
Thanks,
Olek
