From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752601AbdKHO7k (ORCPT ); Wed, 8 Nov 2017 09:59:40 -0500 Received: from mail-yw0-f196.google.com ([209.85.161.196]:51616 "EHLO mail-yw0-f196.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751356AbdKHO7i (ORCPT ); Wed, 8 Nov 2017 09:59:38 -0500 X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABhQp+SUdz66tT+6WmAxsTNQCCLjxENCI+vECylm9EyKTc2fP3+286aH80KX2pzjo8YEeAaft0OFIg== Date: Wed, 8 Nov 2017 09:59:36 -0500 From: Josh Abraham To: Greg KH Cc: ruxandra.radulescu@nxp.com, devel@driverdev.osuosl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] staging: fsl-dpaa2: Fix multiple assignments should be avoided Message-ID: <20171108145936.GA5506@josharch> References: <20171108004503.GA27756@josharch> <20171108092048.GB22620@kroah.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20171108092048.GB22620@kroah.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.1 (2017-09-22) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Nov 08, 2017 at 10:20:48AM +0100, Greg KH wrote: > On Tue, Nov 07, 2017 at 07:45:03PM -0500, Joshua Abraham wrote: > > This patch fixes the checkpatch.pl warning: > > "CHECK: multiple assignments should be avoided" > > > > Signed-off-by: Joshua Abraham > > --- > > drivers/staging/fsl-dpaa2/ethernet/dpaa2-eth.c | 3 ++- > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/staging/fsl-dpaa2/ethernet/dpaa2-eth.c b/drivers/staging/fsl-dpaa2/ethernet/dpaa2-eth.c > > index 0d8ed002adcb..384218946108 100644 > > --- a/drivers/staging/fsl-dpaa2/ethernet/dpaa2-eth.c > > +++ b/drivers/staging/fsl-dpaa2/ethernet/dpaa2-eth.c > > @@ -1661,7 +1661,8 @@ static void set_fq_affinity(struct dpaa2_eth_priv *priv) > > * This may well change at runtime, either through irqbalance or > > * through direct user intervention. > > */ > > - rx_cpu = txc_cpu = cpumask_first(&priv->dpio_cpumask); > > + rx_cpu = cpumask_first(&priv->dpio_cpumask); > > + txc_cpu = rx_cpu; > > The original code here makes much more sense, doesn't it? > > Sometimes checkpatch is wrong :) > > thanks, > > greg k-h It does make a lot more sense. I will trust checkpatch less, and my eyes more :) -Josh