[PATCH] drivers: CCI: Correct use of ! and &

[PATCH] drivers: CCI: Correct use of ! and &

[Himangi Saraogi]

In commit ae91d60ba88ef0bdb1b5e9b2363bd52fc45d2af7, a bug was fixed that
involved converting !x & y to !(x & y).  The code below shows the same
pattern, and thus should perhaps be fixed in the same way.

The Coccinelle semantic patch that makes this change is as follows:

// <smpl>
@@ expression E1,E2; @@
(
  !E1 & !E2
|
- !E1 & E2
+ !(E1 & E2)
)
// </smpl>

Signed-off-by: Himangi Saraogi <himangi774@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@lip6.fr>
---
This is not tested and clearly changes the semantics, so it is only
something to consider.
 drivers/bus/arm-cci.c | 3 ++-
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/drivers/bus/arm-cci.c b/drivers/bus/arm-cci.c
index 5a86da9..7af78df 100644
--- a/drivers/bus/arm-cci.c
+++ b/drivers/bus/arm-cci.c
@@ -397,7 +397,8 @@ static irqreturn_t pmu_handle_irq(int irq_num, void *dev)
 		hw_counter = &event->hw;
 
 		/* Did this counter overflow? */
-		if (!pmu_read_register(idx, CCI_PMU_OVRFLW) & CCI_PMU_OVRFLW_FLAG)
+		if (!(pmu_read_register(idx, CCI_PMU_OVRFLW) &
+		      CCI_PMU_OVRFLW_FLAG))
 			continue;
 
 		pmu_write_register(CCI_PMU_OVRFLW_FLAG, idx, CCI_PMU_OVRFLW);
-- 
1.9.1

Re: [PATCH] drivers: CCI: Correct use of ! and &

[Punit Agrawal]

Adding alkml and Will

Hi Himangi,

In future it would help if you send the patch to the the maintainers by
running the get_maintainers.pl script on the patch.

Himangi Saraogi <himangi774@gmail.com> writes:

> In commit ae91d60ba88ef0bdb1b5e9b2363bd52fc45d2af7, a bug was fixed that
> involved converting !x & y to !(x & y).  The code below shows the same
> pattern, and thus should perhaps be fixed in the same way.
>
> The Coccinelle semantic patch that makes this change is as follows:
>
> // <smpl>
> @@ expression E1,E2; @@
> (
>   !E1 & !E2
> |
> - !E1 & E2
> + !(E1 & E2)
> )
> // </smpl>
>
> Signed-off-by: Himangi Saraogi <himangi774@gmail.com>
> Acked-by: Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@lip6.fr>
> ---
> This is not tested and clearly changes the semantics, so it is only
> something to consider.
>  drivers/bus/arm-cci.c | 3 ++-
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/bus/arm-cci.c b/drivers/bus/arm-cci.c
> index 5a86da9..7af78df 100644
> --- a/drivers/bus/arm-cci.c
> +++ b/drivers/bus/arm-cci.c
> @@ -397,7 +397,8 @@ static irqreturn_t pmu_handle_irq(int irq_num, void *dev)
>  		hw_counter = &event->hw;
>  
>  		/* Did this counter overflow? */
> -		if (!pmu_read_register(idx, CCI_PMU_OVRFLW) & CCI_PMU_OVRFLW_FLAG)
> +		if (!(pmu_read_register(idx, CCI_PMU_OVRFLW) &
> +		      CCI_PMU_OVRFLW_FLAG))
>  			continue;


Going back to the manual, this fix looks correct.

Acked-by: Punit Agrawal <punit.agrawal@arm.com>

Will, would this go via your tree?

>  
>  		pmu_write_register(CCI_PMU_OVRFLW_FLAG, idx, CCI_PMU_OVRFLW);

[PATCH] drivers: CCI: Correct use of ! and &

[Punit Agrawal]

Adding alkml and Will

Hi Himangi,

In future it would help if you send the patch to the the maintainers by
running the get_maintainers.pl script on the patch.

Himangi Saraogi <himangi774@gmail.com> writes:

> In commit ae91d60ba88ef0bdb1b5e9b2363bd52fc45d2af7, a bug was fixed that
> involved converting !x & y to !(x & y).  The code below shows the same
> pattern, and thus should perhaps be fixed in the same way.
>
> The Coccinelle semantic patch that makes this change is as follows:
>
> // <smpl>
> @@ expression E1,E2; @@
> (
>   !E1 & !E2
> |
> - !E1 & E2
> + !(E1 & E2)
> )
> // </smpl>
>
> Signed-off-by: Himangi Saraogi <himangi774@gmail.com>
> Acked-by: Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@lip6.fr>
> ---
> This is not tested and clearly changes the semantics, so it is only
> something to consider.
>  drivers/bus/arm-cci.c | 3 ++-
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/bus/arm-cci.c b/drivers/bus/arm-cci.c
> index 5a86da9..7af78df 100644
> --- a/drivers/bus/arm-cci.c
> +++ b/drivers/bus/arm-cci.c
> @@ -397,7 +397,8 @@ static irqreturn_t pmu_handle_irq(int irq_num, void *dev)
>  		hw_counter = &event->hw;
>  
>  		/* Did this counter overflow? */
> -		if (!pmu_read_register(idx, CCI_PMU_OVRFLW) & CCI_PMU_OVRFLW_FLAG)
> +		if (!(pmu_read_register(idx, CCI_PMU_OVRFLW) &
> +		      CCI_PMU_OVRFLW_FLAG))
>  			continue;


Going back to the manual, this fix looks correct.

Acked-by: Punit Agrawal <punit.agrawal@arm.com>

Will, would this go via your tree?

>  
>  		pmu_write_register(CCI_PMU_OVRFLW_FLAG, idx, CCI_PMU_OVRFLW);

Re: [PATCH] drivers: CCI: Correct use of ! and &

[Will Deacon]

On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 04:01:56PM +0100, Punit Agrawal wrote:
> > diff --git a/drivers/bus/arm-cci.c b/drivers/bus/arm-cci.c
> > index 5a86da9..7af78df 100644
> > --- a/drivers/bus/arm-cci.c
> > +++ b/drivers/bus/arm-cci.c
> > @@ -397,7 +397,8 @@ static irqreturn_t pmu_handle_irq(int irq_num, void *dev)
> >  		hw_counter = &event->hw;
> >  
> >  		/* Did this counter overflow? */
> > -		if (!pmu_read_register(idx, CCI_PMU_OVRFLW) & CCI_PMU_OVRFLW_FLAG)
> > +		if (!(pmu_read_register(idx, CCI_PMU_OVRFLW) &
> > +		      CCI_PMU_OVRFLW_FLAG))
> >  			continue;
> 
> 
> Going back to the manual, this fix looks correct.
> 
> Acked-by: Punit Agrawal <punit.agrawal@arm.com>
> 
> Will, would this go via your tree?

Given that you're happy with it, I don't mind which tree it goes in.
Probably deserves a CC stable on it too.

If you get stuck, put it in rmk's patch system.

Will

[PATCH] drivers: CCI: Correct use of ! and &

[Will Deacon]

On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 04:01:56PM +0100, Punit Agrawal wrote:
> > diff --git a/drivers/bus/arm-cci.c b/drivers/bus/arm-cci.c
> > index 5a86da9..7af78df 100644
> > --- a/drivers/bus/arm-cci.c
> > +++ b/drivers/bus/arm-cci.c
> > @@ -397,7 +397,8 @@ static irqreturn_t pmu_handle_irq(int irq_num, void *dev)
> >  		hw_counter = &event->hw;
> >  
> >  		/* Did this counter overflow? */
> > -		if (!pmu_read_register(idx, CCI_PMU_OVRFLW) & CCI_PMU_OVRFLW_FLAG)
> > +		if (!(pmu_read_register(idx, CCI_PMU_OVRFLW) &
> > +		      CCI_PMU_OVRFLW_FLAG))
> >  			continue;
> 
> 
> Going back to the manual, this fix looks correct.
> 
> Acked-by: Punit Agrawal <punit.agrawal@arm.com>
> 
> Will, would this go via your tree?

Given that you're happy with it, I don't mind which tree it goes in.
Probably deserves a CC stable on it too.

If you get stuck, put it in rmk's patch system.

Will

Re: [PATCH] drivers: CCI: Correct use of ! and &

[Punit Agrawal]

Hi Arnd,

Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com> writes:

> On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 04:01:56PM +0100, Punit Agrawal wrote:
>> > diff --git a/drivers/bus/arm-cci.c b/drivers/bus/arm-cci.c
>> > index 5a86da9..7af78df 100644
>> > --- a/drivers/bus/arm-cci.c
>> > +++ b/drivers/bus/arm-cci.c
>> > @@ -397,7 +397,8 @@ static irqreturn_t pmu_handle_irq(int irq_num, void *dev)
>> >  		hw_counter = &event->hw;
>> >  
>> >  		/* Did this counter overflow? */
>> > -		if (!pmu_read_register(idx, CCI_PMU_OVRFLW) & CCI_PMU_OVRFLW_FLAG)
>> > +		if (!(pmu_read_register(idx, CCI_PMU_OVRFLW) &
>> > +		      CCI_PMU_OVRFLW_FLAG))
>> >  			continue;
>> 
>> 
>> Going back to the manual, this fix looks correct.
>> 
>> Acked-by: Punit Agrawal <punit.agrawal@arm.com>
>> 
>> Will, would this go via your tree?
>
> Given that you're happy with it, I don't mind which tree it goes in.
> Probably deserves a CC stable on it too.

The CCI PMU patches went via arm-soc. Are you happy to pick this fix with
the Ack and a Cc to stable.

Cheers,
Punit

>
> If you get stuck, put it in rmk's patch system.
>
> Will
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[PATCH] drivers: CCI: Correct use of ! and &

[Punit Agrawal]

Hi Arnd,

Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com> writes:

> On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 04:01:56PM +0100, Punit Agrawal wrote:
>> > diff --git a/drivers/bus/arm-cci.c b/drivers/bus/arm-cci.c
>> > index 5a86da9..7af78df 100644
>> > --- a/drivers/bus/arm-cci.c
>> > +++ b/drivers/bus/arm-cci.c
>> > @@ -397,7 +397,8 @@ static irqreturn_t pmu_handle_irq(int irq_num, void *dev)
>> >  		hw_counter = &event->hw;
>> >  
>> >  		/* Did this counter overflow? */
>> > -		if (!pmu_read_register(idx, CCI_PMU_OVRFLW) & CCI_PMU_OVRFLW_FLAG)
>> > +		if (!(pmu_read_register(idx, CCI_PMU_OVRFLW) &
>> > +		      CCI_PMU_OVRFLW_FLAG))
>> >  			continue;
>> 
>> 
>> Going back to the manual, this fix looks correct.
>> 
>> Acked-by: Punit Agrawal <punit.agrawal@arm.com>
>> 
>> Will, would this go via your tree?
>
> Given that you're happy with it, I don't mind which tree it goes in.
> Probably deserves a CC stable on it too.

The CCI PMU patches went via arm-soc. Are you happy to pick this fix with
the Ack and a Cc to stable.

Cheers,
Punit

>
> If you get stuck, put it in rmk's patch system.
>
> Will
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo at vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Re: [PATCH] drivers: CCI: Correct use of ! and &

[Olof Johansson]

On Tue, Jul 29, 2014 at 4:34 AM, Punit Agrawal <punit.agrawal@arm.com> wrote:
> Hi Arnd,
>
> Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com> writes:
>
>> On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 04:01:56PM +0100, Punit Agrawal wrote:
>>> > diff --git a/drivers/bus/arm-cci.c b/drivers/bus/arm-cci.c
>>> > index 5a86da9..7af78df 100644
>>> > --- a/drivers/bus/arm-cci.c
>>> > +++ b/drivers/bus/arm-cci.c
>>> > @@ -397,7 +397,8 @@ static irqreturn_t pmu_handle_irq(int irq_num, void *dev)
>>> >            hw_counter = &event->hw;
>>> >
>>> >            /* Did this counter overflow? */
>>> > -          if (!pmu_read_register(idx, CCI_PMU_OVRFLW) & CCI_PMU_OVRFLW_FLAG)
>>> > +          if (!(pmu_read_register(idx, CCI_PMU_OVRFLW) &
>>> > +                CCI_PMU_OVRFLW_FLAG))
>>> >                    continue;
>>>
>>>
>>> Going back to the manual, this fix looks correct.
>>>
>>> Acked-by: Punit Agrawal <punit.agrawal@arm.com>
>>>
>>> Will, would this go via your tree?
>>
>> Given that you're happy with it, I don't mind which tree it goes in.
>> Probably deserves a CC stable on it too.
>
> The CCI PMU patches went via arm-soc. Are you happy to pick this fix with
> the Ack and a Cc to stable.

Yeah, we've been merging most of the CCI patches.

Please resend the patch to arm@kernel.org if you want us to apply it.


Thanks,

-Olof

[PATCH] drivers: CCI: Correct use of ! and &

[Olof Johansson]

On Tue, Jul 29, 2014 at 4:34 AM, Punit Agrawal <punit.agrawal@arm.com> wrote:
> Hi Arnd,
>
> Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com> writes:
>
>> On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 04:01:56PM +0100, Punit Agrawal wrote:
>>> > diff --git a/drivers/bus/arm-cci.c b/drivers/bus/arm-cci.c
>>> > index 5a86da9..7af78df 100644
>>> > --- a/drivers/bus/arm-cci.c
>>> > +++ b/drivers/bus/arm-cci.c
>>> > @@ -397,7 +397,8 @@ static irqreturn_t pmu_handle_irq(int irq_num, void *dev)
>>> >            hw_counter = &event->hw;
>>> >
>>> >            /* Did this counter overflow? */
>>> > -          if (!pmu_read_register(idx, CCI_PMU_OVRFLW) & CCI_PMU_OVRFLW_FLAG)
>>> > +          if (!(pmu_read_register(idx, CCI_PMU_OVRFLW) &
>>> > +                CCI_PMU_OVRFLW_FLAG))
>>> >                    continue;
>>>
>>>
>>> Going back to the manual, this fix looks correct.
>>>
>>> Acked-by: Punit Agrawal <punit.agrawal@arm.com>
>>>
>>> Will, would this go via your tree?
>>
>> Given that you're happy with it, I don't mind which tree it goes in.
>> Probably deserves a CC stable on it too.
>
> The CCI PMU patches went via arm-soc. Are you happy to pick this fix with
> the Ack and a Cc to stable.

Yeah, we've been merging most of the CCI patches.

Please resend the patch to arm at kernel.org if you want us to apply it.


Thanks,

-Olof

Re: [PATCH] drivers: CCI: Correct use of ! and &

[Punit Agrawal]

Olof Johansson <olof@lixom.net> writes:

> On Tue, Jul 29, 2014 at 4:34 AM, Punit Agrawal <punit.agrawal@arm.com> wrote:
>> Hi Arnd,
>>
>> Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com> writes:
>>
>>> On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 04:01:56PM +0100, Punit Agrawal wrote:
>>>> > diff --git a/drivers/bus/arm-cci.c b/drivers/bus/arm-cci.c
>>>> > index 5a86da9..7af78df 100644
>>>> > --- a/drivers/bus/arm-cci.c
>>>> > +++ b/drivers/bus/arm-cci.c
>>>> > @@ -397,7 +397,8 @@ static irqreturn_t pmu_handle_irq(int irq_num, void *dev)
>>>> >            hw_counter = &event->hw;
>>>> >
>>>> >            /* Did this counter overflow? */
>>>> > -          if (!pmu_read_register(idx, CCI_PMU_OVRFLW) & CCI_PMU_OVRFLW_FLAG)
>>>> > +          if (!(pmu_read_register(idx, CCI_PMU_OVRFLW) &
>>>> > +                CCI_PMU_OVRFLW_FLAG))
>>>> >                    continue;
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Going back to the manual, this fix looks correct.
>>>>
>>>> Acked-by: Punit Agrawal <punit.agrawal@arm.com>
>>>>
>>>> Will, would this go via your tree?
>>>
>>> Given that you're happy with it, I don't mind which tree it goes in.
>>> Probably deserves a CC stable on it too.
>>
>> The CCI PMU patches went via arm-soc. Are you happy to pick this fix with
>> the Ack and a Cc to stable.
>
> Yeah, we've been merging most of the CCI patches.
>
> Please resend the patch to arm@kernel.org if you want us to apply it.

Ok, thanks! I'll send the patch with the tags applied shortly.

>
>
> Thanks,
>
> -Olof
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[PATCH] drivers: CCI: Correct use of ! and &

[Punit Agrawal]

Olof Johansson <olof@lixom.net> writes:

> On Tue, Jul 29, 2014 at 4:34 AM, Punit Agrawal <punit.agrawal@arm.com> wrote:
>> Hi Arnd,
>>
>> Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com> writes:
>>
>>> On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 04:01:56PM +0100, Punit Agrawal wrote:
>>>> > diff --git a/drivers/bus/arm-cci.c b/drivers/bus/arm-cci.c
>>>> > index 5a86da9..7af78df 100644
>>>> > --- a/drivers/bus/arm-cci.c
>>>> > +++ b/drivers/bus/arm-cci.c
>>>> > @@ -397,7 +397,8 @@ static irqreturn_t pmu_handle_irq(int irq_num, void *dev)
>>>> >            hw_counter = &event->hw;
>>>> >
>>>> >            /* Did this counter overflow? */
>>>> > -          if (!pmu_read_register(idx, CCI_PMU_OVRFLW) & CCI_PMU_OVRFLW_FLAG)
>>>> > +          if (!(pmu_read_register(idx, CCI_PMU_OVRFLW) &
>>>> > +                CCI_PMU_OVRFLW_FLAG))
>>>> >                    continue;
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Going back to the manual, this fix looks correct.
>>>>
>>>> Acked-by: Punit Agrawal <punit.agrawal@arm.com>
>>>>
>>>> Will, would this go via your tree?
>>>
>>> Given that you're happy with it, I don't mind which tree it goes in.
>>> Probably deserves a CC stable on it too.
>>
>> The CCI PMU patches went via arm-soc. Are you happy to pick this fix with
>> the Ack and a Cc to stable.
>
> Yeah, we've been merging most of the CCI patches.
>
> Please resend the patch to arm at kernel.org if you want us to apply it.

Ok, thanks! I'll send the patch with the tags applied shortly.

>
>
> Thanks,
>
> -Olof
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo at vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[PATCH] drivers: CCI: Correct use of ! and &

[Punit Agrawal]

Hi Olof,

Olof Johansson <olof@lixom.net> writes:

> Hi,
>
> On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 12:54 PM, Olof Johansson <olof@lixom.net> wrote:
>> On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 11:37:35AM +0100, Punit Agrawal wrote:
>>> From: Himangi Saraogi <himangi774@gmail.com>
>>>
>>> In commit ae91d60ba88ef0bdb1b5e9b2363bd52fc45d2af7, a bug was fixed that
>>> involved converting !x & y to !(x & y).  The code below shows the same
>>> pattern, and thus should perhaps be fixed in the same way.
>>>
>>> The Coccinelle semantic patch that makes this change is as follows:
>>>
>>> // <smpl>
>>> @@ expression E1,E2; @@
>>> (
>>>   !E1 & !E2
>>> |
>>> - !E1 & E2
>>> + !(E1 & E2)
>>> )
>>> // </smpl>
>>>
>>> Cc: stable at vger.kernel.org
>>> Signed-off-by: Himangi Saraogi <himangi774@gmail.com>
>>> Acked-by: Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@lip6.fr>
>>> Acked-by: Punit Agrawal <punit.agrawal@arm.com>
>>> ---
>>
>> Thanks, applied (adding a Fixes: tag, please use those in the future)

Will do.

>
> On second look, I see that the code doesn't actually change behavior
> (since the mask is done with 0x1, it happens to have the same result).
> Pure luck before. :)

Although I'd tested the original submission and had seen interrupts
handled correctly, this fix made me question if I was mis-remembering
(since this was about a year ago).

I had convinced myself that the fix was required. Re-evaluating all the
conditions after reading your response, I agree that it is not a change
in behaviour but still a correct fix.

>
> Because of this, I've moved this to our next/fixes-non-critical
> branch, which will be sent up during the 3.17 merge window, and I took
> off the stable cc. It's still a good fix, but since it doesn't
> actually fix broken behavior there's no need to rush it.

Ack. Thanks a lot.

>
>
> -Olof
>
> _______________________________________________
> linux-arm-kernel mailing list
> linux-arm-kernel at lists.infradead.org
> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

[PATCH] drivers: CCI: Correct use of ! and &

[Olof Johansson]

Hi,

On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 12:54 PM, Olof Johansson <olof@lixom.net> wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 11:37:35AM +0100, Punit Agrawal wrote:
>> From: Himangi Saraogi <himangi774@gmail.com>
>>
>> In commit ae91d60ba88ef0bdb1b5e9b2363bd52fc45d2af7, a bug was fixed that
>> involved converting !x & y to !(x & y).  The code below shows the same
>> pattern, and thus should perhaps be fixed in the same way.
>>
>> The Coccinelle semantic patch that makes this change is as follows:
>>
>> // <smpl>
>> @@ expression E1,E2; @@
>> (
>>   !E1 & !E2
>> |
>> - !E1 & E2
>> + !(E1 & E2)
>> )
>> // </smpl>
>>
>> Cc: stable at vger.kernel.org
>> Signed-off-by: Himangi Saraogi <himangi774@gmail.com>
>> Acked-by: Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@lip6.fr>
>> Acked-by: Punit Agrawal <punit.agrawal@arm.com>
>> ---
>
> Thanks, applied (adding a Fixes: tag, please use those in the future)

On second look, I see that the code doesn't actually change behavior
(since the mask is done with 0x1, it happens to have the same result).
Pure luck before. :)

Because of this, I've moved this to our next/fixes-non-critical
branch, which will be sent up during the 3.17 merge window, and I took
off the stable cc. It's still a good fix, but since it doesn't
actually fix broken behavior there's no need to rush it.


-Olof

[PATCH] drivers: CCI: Correct use of ! and &

[Olof Johansson]

On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 11:37:35AM +0100, Punit Agrawal wrote:
> From: Himangi Saraogi <himangi774@gmail.com>
> 
> In commit ae91d60ba88ef0bdb1b5e9b2363bd52fc45d2af7, a bug was fixed that
> involved converting !x & y to !(x & y).  The code below shows the same
> pattern, and thus should perhaps be fixed in the same way.
> 
> The Coccinelle semantic patch that makes this change is as follows:
> 
> // <smpl>
> @@ expression E1,E2; @@
> (
>   !E1 & !E2
> |
> - !E1 & E2
> + !(E1 & E2)
> )
> // </smpl>
> 
> Cc: stable at vger.kernel.org
> Signed-off-by: Himangi Saraogi <himangi774@gmail.com>
> Acked-by: Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@lip6.fr>
> Acked-by: Punit Agrawal <punit.agrawal@arm.com>
> ---

Thanks, applied (adding a Fixes: tag, please use those in the future)


-Olof

[PATCH] drivers: CCI: Correct use of ! and &

[Punit Agrawal]

From: Himangi Saraogi <himangi774@gmail.com>

In commit ae91d60ba88ef0bdb1b5e9b2363bd52fc45d2af7, a bug was fixed that
involved converting !x & y to !(x & y).  The code below shows the same
pattern, and thus should perhaps be fixed in the same way.

The Coccinelle semantic patch that makes this change is as follows:

// <smpl>
@@ expression E1,E2; @@
(
  !E1 & !E2
|
- !E1 & E2
+ !(E1 & E2)
)
// </smpl>

Cc: stable at vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Himangi Saraogi <himangi774@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@lip6.fr>
Acked-by: Punit Agrawal <punit.agrawal@arm.com>
---
 drivers/bus/arm-cci.c |    3 ++-
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/drivers/bus/arm-cci.c b/drivers/bus/arm-cci.c
index 5a86da9..7af78df 100644
--- a/drivers/bus/arm-cci.c
+++ b/drivers/bus/arm-cci.c
@@ -397,7 +397,8 @@ static irqreturn_t pmu_handle_irq(int irq_num, void *dev)
 		hw_counter = &event->hw;
 
 		/* Did this counter overflow? */
-		if (!pmu_read_register(idx, CCI_PMU_OVRFLW) & CCI_PMU_OVRFLW_FLAG)
+		if (!(pmu_read_register(idx, CCI_PMU_OVRFLW) &
+		      CCI_PMU_OVRFLW_FLAG))
 			continue;
 
 		pmu_write_register(CCI_PMU_OVRFLW_FLAG, idx, CCI_PMU_OVRFLW);
-- 
1.7.10.4