* [PATCH] pwm: sun4i: redundant assignment to variable pval @ 2019-10-02 10:08 ` Colin King 0 siblings, 0 replies; 34+ messages in thread From: Colin King @ 2019-10-02 10:08 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Thierry Reding, Uwe Kleine-König, Maxime Ripard, Chen-Yu Tsai, linux-pwm, linux-arm-kernel Cc: kernel-janitors, linux-kernel From: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com> Variable pval is being assigned a value that is never read. The assignment is redundant and hence can be removed. Addresses-Coverity: ("Unused value") Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com> --- drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c | 1 - 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c b/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c index 6f5840a1a82d..53970d4ba695 100644 --- a/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c +++ b/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c @@ -156,7 +156,6 @@ static int sun4i_pwm_calculate(struct sun4i_pwm_chip *sun4i_pwm, if (sun4i_pwm->data->has_prescaler_bypass) { /* First, test without any prescaler when available */ prescaler = PWM_PRESCAL_MASK; - pval = 1; /* * When not using any prescaler, the clock period in nanoseconds * is not an integer so round it half up instead of -- 2.20.1 ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 34+ messages in thread
* [PATCH] pwm: sun4i: redundant assignment to variable pval @ 2019-10-02 10:08 ` Colin King 0 siblings, 0 replies; 34+ messages in thread From: Colin King @ 2019-10-02 10:08 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Thierry Reding, Uwe Kleine-König, Maxime Ripard, Chen-Yu Tsai, linux-pwm, linux-arm-kernel Cc: kernel-janitors, linux-kernel From: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com> Variable pval is being assigned a value that is never read. The assignment is redundant and hence can be removed. Addresses-Coverity: ("Unused value") Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com> --- drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c | 1 - 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c b/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c index 6f5840a1a82d..53970d4ba695 100644 --- a/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c +++ b/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c @@ -156,7 +156,6 @@ static int sun4i_pwm_calculate(struct sun4i_pwm_chip *sun4i_pwm, if (sun4i_pwm->data->has_prescaler_bypass) { /* First, test without any prescaler when available */ prescaler = PWM_PRESCAL_MASK; - pval = 1; /* * When not using any prescaler, the clock period in nanoseconds * is not an integer so round it half up instead of -- 2.20.1 _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 34+ messages in thread
* [PATCH] pwm: sun4i: redundant assignment to variable pval @ 2019-10-02 10:08 ` Colin King 0 siblings, 0 replies; 34+ messages in thread From: Colin King @ 2019-10-02 10:08 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Thierry Reding, Uwe Kleine-König, Maxime Ripard, Chen-Yu Tsai, linux-pwm, linux-arm-kernel Cc: kernel-janitors, linux-kernel From: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com> Variable pval is being assigned a value that is never read. The assignment is redundant and hence can be removed. Addresses-Coverity: ("Unused value") Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com> --- drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c | 1 - 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c b/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c index 6f5840a1a82d..53970d4ba695 100644 --- a/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c +++ b/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c @@ -156,7 +156,6 @@ static int sun4i_pwm_calculate(struct sun4i_pwm_chip *sun4i_pwm, if (sun4i_pwm->data->has_prescaler_bypass) { /* First, test without any prescaler when available */ prescaler = PWM_PRESCAL_MASK; - pval = 1; /* * When not using any prescaler, the clock period in nanoseconds * is not an integer so round it half up instead of -- 2.20.1 ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 34+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] pwm: sun4i: redundant assignment to variable pval 2019-10-02 10:08 ` Colin King (?) @ 2019-10-02 10:16 ` Uwe Kleine-König -1 siblings, 0 replies; 34+ messages in thread From: Uwe Kleine-König @ 2019-10-02 10:16 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Colin King Cc: Thierry Reding, Maxime Ripard, Chen-Yu Tsai, linux-pwm, linux-arm-kernel, kernel-janitors, linux-kernel On Wed, Oct 02, 2019 at 11:08:44AM +0100, Colin King wrote: > From: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com> > > Variable pval is being assigned a value that is never read. The > assignment is redundant and hence can be removed. > > Addresses-Coverity: ("Unused value") > Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com> > --- > drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c | 1 - > 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c b/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c > index 6f5840a1a82d..53970d4ba695 100644 > --- a/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c > +++ b/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c > @@ -156,7 +156,6 @@ static int sun4i_pwm_calculate(struct sun4i_pwm_chip *sun4i_pwm, > if (sun4i_pwm->data->has_prescaler_bypass) { > /* First, test without any prescaler when available */ > prescaler = PWM_PRESCAL_MASK; > - pval = 1; > /* > * When not using any prescaler, the clock period in nanoseconds > * is not an integer so round it half up instead of Looks fine, the issue exists since deb9c462f4e539cc7f8389b9855eb7a507c78e7e. You can even make pval a local variable for the second for loop. Best regards Uwe -- Pengutronix e.K. | Uwe Kleine-König | Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ | ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 34+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] pwm: sun4i: redundant assignment to variable pval @ 2019-10-02 10:16 ` Uwe Kleine-König 0 siblings, 0 replies; 34+ messages in thread From: Uwe Kleine-König @ 2019-10-02 10:16 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Colin King Cc: linux-pwm, kernel-janitors, linux-kernel, Maxime Ripard, Chen-Yu Tsai, Thierry Reding, linux-arm-kernel On Wed, Oct 02, 2019 at 11:08:44AM +0100, Colin King wrote: > From: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com> > > Variable pval is being assigned a value that is never read. The > assignment is redundant and hence can be removed. > > Addresses-Coverity: ("Unused value") > Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com> > --- > drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c | 1 - > 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c b/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c > index 6f5840a1a82d..53970d4ba695 100644 > --- a/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c > +++ b/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c > @@ -156,7 +156,6 @@ static int sun4i_pwm_calculate(struct sun4i_pwm_chip *sun4i_pwm, > if (sun4i_pwm->data->has_prescaler_bypass) { > /* First, test without any prescaler when available */ > prescaler = PWM_PRESCAL_MASK; > - pval = 1; > /* > * When not using any prescaler, the clock period in nanoseconds > * is not an integer so round it half up instead of Looks fine, the issue exists since deb9c462f4e539cc7f8389b9855eb7a507c78e7e. You can even make pval a local variable for the second for loop. Best regards Uwe -- Pengutronix e.K. | Uwe Kleine-König | Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ | _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 34+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] pwm: sun4i: redundant assignment to variable pval @ 2019-10-02 10:16 ` Uwe Kleine-König 0 siblings, 0 replies; 34+ messages in thread From: Uwe Kleine-König @ 2019-10-02 10:16 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Colin King Cc: linux-pwm, kernel-janitors, linux-kernel, Maxime Ripard, Chen-Yu Tsai, Thierry Reding, linux-arm-kernel On Wed, Oct 02, 2019 at 11:08:44AM +0100, Colin King wrote: > From: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com> > > Variable pval is being assigned a value that is never read. The > assignment is redundant and hence can be removed. > > Addresses-Coverity: ("Unused value") > Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com> > --- > drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c | 1 - > 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c b/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c > index 6f5840a1a82d..53970d4ba695 100644 > --- a/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c > +++ b/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c > @@ -156,7 +156,6 @@ static int sun4i_pwm_calculate(struct sun4i_pwm_chip *sun4i_pwm, > if (sun4i_pwm->data->has_prescaler_bypass) { > /* First, test without any prescaler when available */ > prescaler = PWM_PRESCAL_MASK; > - pval = 1; > /* > * When not using any prescaler, the clock period in nanoseconds > * is not an integer so round it half up instead of Looks fine, the issue exists since deb9c462f4e539cc7f8389b9855eb7a507c78e7e. You can even make pval a local variable for the second for loop. Best regards Uwe -- Pengutronix e.K. | Uwe Kleine-König | Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ | ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 34+ messages in thread
* [PATCH] pwm: sun4i: Narrow scope of local variable 2019-10-02 10:16 ` Uwe Kleine-König @ 2019-12-05 7:24 ` Uwe Kleine-König -1 siblings, 0 replies; 34+ messages in thread From: Uwe Kleine-König @ 2019-12-05 7:24 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Colin King, Thierry Reding Cc: linux-pwm, Dan Carpenter, kernel-janitors, linux-arm-kernel, kernel The variable pval is only used in a single block in the function sun4i_pwm_calculate(). So declare it in a more local scope to simplify the function for humans and compilers. While the diffstat for this patch is negative for this patch I still thing the advantage of having a narrower scope is beneficial. Signed-off-by: Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de> --- Hello, for the patch that became 1b98ad3b3be9 ("pwm: sun4i: Drop redundant assignment to variable pval") (and which yielded the situation that pval is only used in this single block) I suggested to do this change. This was ignored however by both Colin and Thierry without comment. So I suggest the change here separately. Best regards Uwe drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c | 4 +++- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c b/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c index 581d23287333..8919e6ab7577 100644 --- a/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c +++ b/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c @@ -149,7 +149,7 @@ static int sun4i_pwm_calculate(struct sun4i_pwm_chip *sun4i_pwm, u32 *dty, u32 *prd, unsigned int *prsclr) { u64 clk_rate, div = 0; - unsigned int pval, prescaler = 0; + unsigned int prescaler = 0; clk_rate = clk_get_rate(sun4i_pwm->clk); @@ -170,6 +170,8 @@ static int sun4i_pwm_calculate(struct sun4i_pwm_chip *sun4i_pwm, if (prescaler = 0) { /* Go up from the first divider */ for (prescaler = 0; prescaler < PWM_PRESCAL_MASK; prescaler++) { + unsigned int pval; + if (!prescaler_table[prescaler]) continue; pval = prescaler_table[prescaler]; -- 2.24.0 ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 34+ messages in thread
* [PATCH] pwm: sun4i: Narrow scope of local variable @ 2019-12-05 7:24 ` Uwe Kleine-König 0 siblings, 0 replies; 34+ messages in thread From: Uwe Kleine-König @ 2019-12-05 7:24 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Colin King, Thierry Reding Cc: linux-pwm, Dan Carpenter, kernel-janitors, linux-arm-kernel, kernel The variable pval is only used in a single block in the function sun4i_pwm_calculate(). So declare it in a more local scope to simplify the function for humans and compilers. While the diffstat for this patch is negative for this patch I still thing the advantage of having a narrower scope is beneficial. Signed-off-by: Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de> --- Hello, for the patch that became 1b98ad3b3be9 ("pwm: sun4i: Drop redundant assignment to variable pval") (and which yielded the situation that pval is only used in this single block) I suggested to do this change. This was ignored however by both Colin and Thierry without comment. So I suggest the change here separately. Best regards Uwe drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c | 4 +++- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c b/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c index 581d23287333..8919e6ab7577 100644 --- a/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c +++ b/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c @@ -149,7 +149,7 @@ static int sun4i_pwm_calculate(struct sun4i_pwm_chip *sun4i_pwm, u32 *dty, u32 *prd, unsigned int *prsclr) { u64 clk_rate, div = 0; - unsigned int pval, prescaler = 0; + unsigned int prescaler = 0; clk_rate = clk_get_rate(sun4i_pwm->clk); @@ -170,6 +170,8 @@ static int sun4i_pwm_calculate(struct sun4i_pwm_chip *sun4i_pwm, if (prescaler == 0) { /* Go up from the first divider */ for (prescaler = 0; prescaler < PWM_PRESCAL_MASK; prescaler++) { + unsigned int pval; + if (!prescaler_table[prescaler]) continue; pval = prescaler_table[prescaler]; -- 2.24.0 _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 34+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] pwm: sun4i: Narrow scope of local variable 2019-12-05 7:24 ` Uwe Kleine-König @ 2019-12-05 8:37 ` walter harms -1 siblings, 0 replies; 34+ messages in thread From: walter harms @ 2019-12-05 8:37 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Uwe Kleine-König Cc: linux-pwm, kernel-janitors, Thierry Reding, Dan Carpenter, kernel, Colin King, linux-arm-kernel Am 05.12.2019 08:24, schrieb Uwe Kleine-König: > The variable pval is only used in a single block in the function > sun4i_pwm_calculate(). So declare it in a more local scope to simplify > the function for humans and compilers. > > While the diffstat for this patch is negative for this patch I still > thing the advantage of having a narrower scope is beneficial. > > Signed-off-by: Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de> > --- > Hello, > > for the patch that became > > 1b98ad3b3be9 ("pwm: sun4i: Drop redundant assignment to variable pval") > > (and which yielded the situation that pval is only used in this single > block) I suggested to do this change. This was ignored however by both > Colin and Thierry without comment. So I suggest the change here > separately. > > Best regards > Uwe > > drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c | 4 +++- > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c b/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c > index 581d23287333..8919e6ab7577 100644 > --- a/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c > +++ b/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c > @@ -149,7 +149,7 @@ static int sun4i_pwm_calculate(struct sun4i_pwm_chip *sun4i_pwm, > u32 *dty, u32 *prd, unsigned int *prsclr) > { > u64 clk_rate, div = 0; > - unsigned int pval, prescaler = 0; > + unsigned int prescaler = 0; > > clk_rate = clk_get_rate(sun4i_pwm->clk); > > @@ -170,6 +170,8 @@ static int sun4i_pwm_calculate(struct sun4i_pwm_chip *sun4i_pwm, > if (prescaler = 0) { > /* Go up from the first divider */ > for (prescaler = 0; prescaler < PWM_PRESCAL_MASK; prescaler++) { > + unsigned int pval; > + > if (!prescaler_table[prescaler]) > continue; > pval = prescaler_table[prescaler]; nit picking: Doing the assignment first would remove the only use of prescaler_table[prescaler]. unsigned int pval = prescaler_table[prescaler]; if ( ! pval ) continue; if you feel adventures you could also replace the for() for a while() since we know that prescaler = 0. while ( prescaler < PWM_PRESCAL_MASK ) { unsigned int pval = prescaler_table[prescaler++]; .... jm2c, wh ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 34+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] pwm: sun4i: Narrow scope of local variable @ 2019-12-05 8:37 ` walter harms 0 siblings, 0 replies; 34+ messages in thread From: walter harms @ 2019-12-05 8:37 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Uwe Kleine-König Cc: linux-pwm, kernel-janitors, Thierry Reding, Dan Carpenter, kernel, Colin King, linux-arm-kernel Am 05.12.2019 08:24, schrieb Uwe Kleine-König: > The variable pval is only used in a single block in the function > sun4i_pwm_calculate(). So declare it in a more local scope to simplify > the function for humans and compilers. > > While the diffstat for this patch is negative for this patch I still > thing the advantage of having a narrower scope is beneficial. > > Signed-off-by: Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de> > --- > Hello, > > for the patch that became > > 1b98ad3b3be9 ("pwm: sun4i: Drop redundant assignment to variable pval") > > (and which yielded the situation that pval is only used in this single > block) I suggested to do this change. This was ignored however by both > Colin and Thierry without comment. So I suggest the change here > separately. > > Best regards > Uwe > > drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c | 4 +++- > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c b/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c > index 581d23287333..8919e6ab7577 100644 > --- a/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c > +++ b/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c > @@ -149,7 +149,7 @@ static int sun4i_pwm_calculate(struct sun4i_pwm_chip *sun4i_pwm, > u32 *dty, u32 *prd, unsigned int *prsclr) > { > u64 clk_rate, div = 0; > - unsigned int pval, prescaler = 0; > + unsigned int prescaler = 0; > > clk_rate = clk_get_rate(sun4i_pwm->clk); > > @@ -170,6 +170,8 @@ static int sun4i_pwm_calculate(struct sun4i_pwm_chip *sun4i_pwm, > if (prescaler == 0) { > /* Go up from the first divider */ > for (prescaler = 0; prescaler < PWM_PRESCAL_MASK; prescaler++) { > + unsigned int pval; > + > if (!prescaler_table[prescaler]) > continue; > pval = prescaler_table[prescaler]; nit picking: Doing the assignment first would remove the only use of prescaler_table[prescaler]. unsigned int pval = prescaler_table[prescaler]; if ( ! pval ) continue; if you feel adventures you could also replace the for() for a while() since we know that prescaler == 0. while ( prescaler < PWM_PRESCAL_MASK ) { unsigned int pval = prescaler_table[prescaler++]; .... jm2c, wh _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 34+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] pwm: sun4i: Narrow scope of local variable 2019-12-05 8:37 ` walter harms (?) @ 2019-12-10 10:12 ` Uwe Kleine-König -1 siblings, 0 replies; 34+ messages in thread From: Uwe Kleine-König @ 2019-12-10 10:12 UTC (permalink / raw) To: walter harms Cc: linux-pwm, kernel-janitors, Thierry Reding, Dan Carpenter, kernel, Colin King, linux-arm-kernel Hello Walter, On Thu, Dec 05, 2019 at 09:37:55AM +0100, walter harms wrote: > Am 05.12.2019 08:24, schrieb Uwe Kleine-König: > > + unsigned int pval; > > + > > if (!prescaler_table[prescaler]) > > continue; > > pval = prescaler_table[prescaler]; > > > nit picking: > Doing the assignment first would remove the only use > of prescaler_table[prescaler]. nit picking: it would be reduced to a single use?! > unsigned int pval = prescaler_table[prescaler]; > if ( ! pval ) > continue; Right, will send a v2 with that. > if you feel adventures you could also replace the for() for a while() > since we know that prescaler = 0. > > while ( prescaler < PWM_PRESCAL_MASK ) > { > unsigned int pval = prescaler_table[prescaler++]; > .... That however has some side effects as prescaler is used after leaving the loop. Best regards Uwe -- Pengutronix e.K. | Uwe Kleine-König | Industrial Linux Solutions | https://www.pengutronix.de/ | ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 34+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] pwm: sun4i: Narrow scope of local variable @ 2019-12-10 10:12 ` Uwe Kleine-König 0 siblings, 0 replies; 34+ messages in thread From: Uwe Kleine-König @ 2019-12-10 10:12 UTC (permalink / raw) To: walter harms Cc: linux-pwm, kernel-janitors, Thierry Reding, Dan Carpenter, kernel, Colin King, linux-arm-kernel Hello Walter, On Thu, Dec 05, 2019 at 09:37:55AM +0100, walter harms wrote: > Am 05.12.2019 08:24, schrieb Uwe Kleine-König: > > + unsigned int pval; > > + > > if (!prescaler_table[prescaler]) > > continue; > > pval = prescaler_table[prescaler]; > > > nit picking: > Doing the assignment first would remove the only use > of prescaler_table[prescaler]. nit picking: it would be reduced to a single use?! > unsigned int pval = prescaler_table[prescaler]; > if ( ! pval ) > continue; Right, will send a v2 with that. > if you feel adventures you could also replace the for() for a while() > since we know that prescaler == 0. > > while ( prescaler < PWM_PRESCAL_MASK ) > { > unsigned int pval = prescaler_table[prescaler++]; > .... That however has some side effects as prescaler is used after leaving the loop. Best regards Uwe -- Pengutronix e.K. | Uwe Kleine-König | Industrial Linux Solutions | https://www.pengutronix.de/ | _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 34+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] pwm: sun4i: Narrow scope of local variable @ 2019-12-10 10:12 ` Uwe Kleine-König 0 siblings, 0 replies; 34+ messages in thread From: Uwe Kleine-König @ 2019-12-10 10:12 UTC (permalink / raw) To: walter harms Cc: linux-pwm, kernel-janitors, Thierry Reding, Dan Carpenter, kernel, Colin King, linux-arm-kernel Hello Walter, On Thu, Dec 05, 2019 at 09:37:55AM +0100, walter harms wrote: > Am 05.12.2019 08:24, schrieb Uwe Kleine-König: > > + unsigned int pval; > > + > > if (!prescaler_table[prescaler]) > > continue; > > pval = prescaler_table[prescaler]; > > > nit picking: > Doing the assignment first would remove the only use > of prescaler_table[prescaler]. nit picking: it would be reduced to a single use?! > unsigned int pval = prescaler_table[prescaler]; > if ( ! pval ) > continue; Right, will send a v2 with that. > if you feel adventures you could also replace the for() for a while() > since we know that prescaler == 0. > > while ( prescaler < PWM_PRESCAL_MASK ) > { > unsigned int pval = prescaler_table[prescaler++]; > .... That however has some side effects as prescaler is used after leaving the loop. Best regards Uwe -- Pengutronix e.K. | Uwe Kleine-König | Industrial Linux Solutions | https://www.pengutronix.de/ | ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 34+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v2] pwm: sun4i: Narrow scope of local variable 2019-12-10 10:12 ` Uwe Kleine-König @ 2019-12-10 10:24 ` Uwe Kleine-König -1 siblings, 0 replies; 34+ messages in thread From: Uwe Kleine-König @ 2019-12-10 10:24 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Colin King, Thierry Reding, Walter Harms Cc: linux-pwm, kernel-janitors, Clément Péron, linux-arm-kernel, kernel, Dan Carpenter The variable pval is only used in a single block in the function sun4i_pwm_calculate(). So declare it in a more local scope to simplify the function for humans and compilers. While at it also simplify assignment to pval. While the diffstat for this patch is negative for this patch I still thing the advantage of having a narrower scope is beneficial. In my compiler / .config setup (gcc 8.2.1, arm/imx_v6_v7_defconfig + COMPILE_TEST + PWM_SUN4I) this change doesn't result in any binary changes. Signed-off-by: Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de> --- Hello, changes since (implicit) v1: - also simplify assignment to pval as suggested by Walter - verify the patch doesn't introduce binary changes Best regards Uwe drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c | 8 +++++--- 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c b/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c index 1fa2057419fb..4f77ebc8ae69 100644 --- a/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c +++ b/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c @@ -152,7 +152,7 @@ static int sun4i_pwm_calculate(struct sun4i_pwm_chip *sun4i_pwm, u32 *dty, u32 *prd, unsigned int *prsclr) { u64 clk_rate, div = 0; - unsigned int pval, prescaler = 0; + unsigned int prescaler = 0; clk_rate = clk_get_rate(sun4i_pwm->clk); @@ -173,9 +173,11 @@ static int sun4i_pwm_calculate(struct sun4i_pwm_chip *sun4i_pwm, if (prescaler = 0) { /* Go up from the first divider */ for (prescaler = 0; prescaler < PWM_PRESCAL_MASK; prescaler++) { + unsigned int pval = prescaler_table[prescaler]; + - if (!prescaler_table[prescaler]) + if (!pval) continue; - pval = prescaler_table[prescaler]; + div = clk_rate; do_div(div, pval); div = div * state->period; -- 2.24.0 ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 34+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v2] pwm: sun4i: Narrow scope of local variable @ 2019-12-10 10:24 ` Uwe Kleine-König 0 siblings, 0 replies; 34+ messages in thread From: Uwe Kleine-König @ 2019-12-10 10:24 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Colin King, Thierry Reding, Walter Harms Cc: linux-pwm, kernel-janitors, Clément Péron, linux-arm-kernel, kernel, Dan Carpenter The variable pval is only used in a single block in the function sun4i_pwm_calculate(). So declare it in a more local scope to simplify the function for humans and compilers. While at it also simplify assignment to pval. While the diffstat for this patch is negative for this patch I still thing the advantage of having a narrower scope is beneficial. In my compiler / .config setup (gcc 8.2.1, arm/imx_v6_v7_defconfig + COMPILE_TEST + PWM_SUN4I) this change doesn't result in any binary changes. Signed-off-by: Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de> --- Hello, changes since (implicit) v1: - also simplify assignment to pval as suggested by Walter - verify the patch doesn't introduce binary changes Best regards Uwe drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c | 8 +++++--- 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c b/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c index 1fa2057419fb..4f77ebc8ae69 100644 --- a/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c +++ b/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c @@ -152,7 +152,7 @@ static int sun4i_pwm_calculate(struct sun4i_pwm_chip *sun4i_pwm, u32 *dty, u32 *prd, unsigned int *prsclr) { u64 clk_rate, div = 0; - unsigned int pval, prescaler = 0; + unsigned int prescaler = 0; clk_rate = clk_get_rate(sun4i_pwm->clk); @@ -173,9 +173,11 @@ static int sun4i_pwm_calculate(struct sun4i_pwm_chip *sun4i_pwm, if (prescaler == 0) { /* Go up from the first divider */ for (prescaler = 0; prescaler < PWM_PRESCAL_MASK; prescaler++) { + unsigned int pval = prescaler_table[prescaler]; + - if (!prescaler_table[prescaler]) + if (!pval) continue; - pval = prescaler_table[prescaler]; + div = clk_rate; do_div(div, pval); div = div * state->period; -- 2.24.0 _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 34+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] pwm: sun4i: redundant assignment to variable pval 2019-10-02 10:08 ` Colin King (?) @ 2019-10-02 10:39 ` Thierry Reding -1 siblings, 0 replies; 34+ messages in thread From: Thierry Reding @ 2019-10-02 10:39 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Colin King Cc: Uwe Kleine-König, Maxime Ripard, Chen-Yu Tsai, linux-pwm, linux-arm-kernel, kernel-janitors, linux-kernel [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 446 bytes --] On Wed, Oct 02, 2019 at 11:08:44AM +0100, Colin King wrote: > From: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com> > > Variable pval is being assigned a value that is never read. The > assignment is redundant and hence can be removed. > > Addresses-Coverity: ("Unused value") > Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com> > --- > drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c | 1 - > 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-) Applied, thanks. Thierry [-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --] [-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 34+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] pwm: sun4i: redundant assignment to variable pval @ 2019-10-02 10:39 ` Thierry Reding 0 siblings, 0 replies; 34+ messages in thread From: Thierry Reding @ 2019-10-02 10:39 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Colin King Cc: linux-pwm, kernel-janitors, linux-kernel, Maxime Ripard, Chen-Yu Tsai, Uwe Kleine-König, linux-arm-kernel [-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 446 bytes --] On Wed, Oct 02, 2019 at 11:08:44AM +0100, Colin King wrote: > From: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com> > > Variable pval is being assigned a value that is never read. The > assignment is redundant and hence can be removed. > > Addresses-Coverity: ("Unused value") > Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com> > --- > drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c | 1 - > 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-) Applied, thanks. Thierry [-- Attachment #1.2: signature.asc --] [-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --] [-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 176 bytes --] _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 34+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] pwm: sun4i: redundant assignment to variable pval @ 2019-10-02 10:39 ` Thierry Reding 0 siblings, 0 replies; 34+ messages in thread From: Thierry Reding @ 2019-10-02 10:39 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Colin King Cc: linux-pwm, kernel-janitors, linux-kernel, Maxime Ripard, Chen-Yu Tsai, Uwe Kleine-König, linux-arm-kernel [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 446 bytes --] On Wed, Oct 02, 2019 at 11:08:44AM +0100, Colin King wrote: > From: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com> > > Variable pval is being assigned a value that is never read. The > assignment is redundant and hence can be removed. > > Addresses-Coverity: ("Unused value") > Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com> > --- > drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c | 1 - > 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-) Applied, thanks. Thierry [-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --] [-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 34+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] pwm: sun4i: redundant assignment to variable pval 2019-10-02 10:08 ` Colin King (?) (?) @ 2019-10-02 13:25 ` Dan Carpenter -1 siblings, 0 replies; 34+ messages in thread From: Dan Carpenter @ 2019-10-02 13:25 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Colin King Cc: Thierry Reding, Uwe Kleine-König, Maxime Ripard, Chen-Yu Tsai, linux-pwm, linux-arm-kernel, kernel-janitors, linux-kernel On Wed, Oct 02, 2019 at 11:08:44AM +0100, Colin King wrote: > From: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com> > > Variable pval is being assigned a value that is never read. The > assignment is redundant and hence can be removed. > > Addresses-Coverity: ("Unused value") > Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com> > --- > drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c | 1 - > 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c b/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c > index 6f5840a1a82d..53970d4ba695 100644 > --- a/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c > +++ b/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c > @@ -156,7 +156,6 @@ static int sun4i_pwm_calculate(struct sun4i_pwm_chip *sun4i_pwm, > if (sun4i_pwm->data->has_prescaler_bypass) { > /* First, test without any prescaler when available */ > prescaler = PWM_PRESCAL_MASK; > - pval = 1; > /* > * When not using any prescaler, the clock period in nanoseconds > * is not an integer so round it half up instead of Are you sure? It looks used to me. regards, dan carpenter ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 34+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] pwm: sun4i: redundant assignment to variable pval @ 2019-10-02 13:25 ` Dan Carpenter 0 siblings, 0 replies; 34+ messages in thread From: Dan Carpenter @ 2019-10-02 13:25 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Colin King Cc: linux-pwm, kernel-janitors, linux-kernel, Maxime Ripard, Chen-Yu Tsai, Thierry Reding, Uwe Kleine-König, linux-arm-kernel On Wed, Oct 02, 2019 at 11:08:44AM +0100, Colin King wrote: > From: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com> > > Variable pval is being assigned a value that is never read. The > assignment is redundant and hence can be removed. > > Addresses-Coverity: ("Unused value") > Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com> > --- > drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c | 1 - > 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c b/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c > index 6f5840a1a82d..53970d4ba695 100644 > --- a/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c > +++ b/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c > @@ -156,7 +156,6 @@ static int sun4i_pwm_calculate(struct sun4i_pwm_chip *sun4i_pwm, > if (sun4i_pwm->data->has_prescaler_bypass) { > /* First, test without any prescaler when available */ > prescaler = PWM_PRESCAL_MASK; > - pval = 1; > /* > * When not using any prescaler, the clock period in nanoseconds > * is not an integer so round it half up instead of Are you sure? It looks used to me. regards, dan carpenter _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 34+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] pwm: sun4i: redundant assignment to variable pval @ 2019-10-02 13:25 ` Dan Carpenter 0 siblings, 0 replies; 34+ messages in thread From: Dan Carpenter @ 2019-10-02 13:25 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Colin King Cc: linux-pwm, kernel-janitors, linux-kernel, Maxime Ripard, Chen-Yu Tsai, Thierry Reding, Uwe Kleine-König, linux-arm-kernel On Wed, Oct 02, 2019 at 11:08:44AM +0100, Colin King wrote: > From: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com> > > Variable pval is being assigned a value that is never read. The > assignment is redundant and hence can be removed. > > Addresses-Coverity: ("Unused value") > Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com> > --- > drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c | 1 - > 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c b/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c > index 6f5840a1a82d..53970d4ba695 100644 > --- a/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c > +++ b/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c > @@ -156,7 +156,6 @@ static int sun4i_pwm_calculate(struct sun4i_pwm_chip *sun4i_pwm, > if (sun4i_pwm->data->has_prescaler_bypass) { > /* First, test without any prescaler when available */ > prescaler = PWM_PRESCAL_MASK; > - pval = 1; > /* > * When not using any prescaler, the clock period in nanoseconds > * is not an integer so round it half up instead of Are you sure? It looks used to me. regards, dan carpenter ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 34+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] pwm: sun4i: redundant assignment to variable pval @ 2019-10-02 13:25 ` Dan Carpenter 0 siblings, 0 replies; 34+ messages in thread From: Dan Carpenter @ 2019-10-02 13:25 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Colin King Cc: linux-pwm, kernel-janitors, linux-kernel, Maxime Ripard, Chen-Yu Tsai, Thierry Reding, Uwe Kleine-König, linux-arm-kernel On Wed, Oct 02, 2019 at 11:08:44AM +0100, Colin King wrote: > From: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com> > > Variable pval is being assigned a value that is never read. The > assignment is redundant and hence can be removed. > > Addresses-Coverity: ("Unused value") > Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com> > --- > drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c | 1 - > 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c b/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c > index 6f5840a1a82d..53970d4ba695 100644 > --- a/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c > +++ b/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c > @@ -156,7 +156,6 @@ static int sun4i_pwm_calculate(struct sun4i_pwm_chip *sun4i_pwm, > if (sun4i_pwm->data->has_prescaler_bypass) { > /* First, test without any prescaler when available */ > prescaler = PWM_PRESCAL_MASK; > - pval = 1; > /* > * When not using any prescaler, the clock period in nanoseconds > * is not an integer so round it half up instead of Are you sure? It looks used to me. regards, dan carpenter ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 34+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] pwm: sun4i: redundant assignment to variable pval 2019-10-02 13:25 ` Dan Carpenter (?) (?) @ 2019-10-02 13:28 ` Colin Ian King -1 siblings, 0 replies; 34+ messages in thread From: Colin Ian King @ 2019-10-02 13:28 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Dan Carpenter Cc: Thierry Reding, Uwe Kleine-König, Maxime Ripard, Chen-Yu Tsai, linux-pwm, linux-arm-kernel, kernel-janitors, linux-kernel On 02/10/2019 14:25, Dan Carpenter wrote: > On Wed, Oct 02, 2019 at 11:08:44AM +0100, Colin King wrote: >> From: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com> >> >> Variable pval is being assigned a value that is never read. The >> assignment is redundant and hence can be removed. >> >> Addresses-Coverity: ("Unused value") >> Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com> >> --- >> drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c | 1 - >> 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c b/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c >> index 6f5840a1a82d..53970d4ba695 100644 >> --- a/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c >> +++ b/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c >> @@ -156,7 +156,6 @@ static int sun4i_pwm_calculate(struct sun4i_pwm_chip *sun4i_pwm, >> if (sun4i_pwm->data->has_prescaler_bypass) { >> /* First, test without any prescaler when available */ >> prescaler = PWM_PRESCAL_MASK; >> - pval = 1; >> /* >> * When not using any prescaler, the clock period in nanoseconds >> * is not an integer so round it half up instead of > > Are you sure? It looks used to me. It's only read in a do_div() and before that it is being assigned: pval = prescaler_table[prescaler]; div = clk_rate; do_div(div, pval); so the assigned value of pval = 1 is never read Colin > > regards, > dan carpenter > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 34+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] pwm: sun4i: redundant assignment to variable pval @ 2019-10-02 13:28 ` Colin Ian King 0 siblings, 0 replies; 34+ messages in thread From: Colin Ian King @ 2019-10-02 13:28 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Dan Carpenter Cc: linux-pwm, kernel-janitors, linux-kernel, Maxime Ripard, Chen-Yu Tsai, Thierry Reding, Uwe Kleine-König, linux-arm-kernel On 02/10/2019 14:25, Dan Carpenter wrote: > On Wed, Oct 02, 2019 at 11:08:44AM +0100, Colin King wrote: >> From: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com> >> >> Variable pval is being assigned a value that is never read. The >> assignment is redundant and hence can be removed. >> >> Addresses-Coverity: ("Unused value") >> Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com> >> --- >> drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c | 1 - >> 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c b/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c >> index 6f5840a1a82d..53970d4ba695 100644 >> --- a/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c >> +++ b/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c >> @@ -156,7 +156,6 @@ static int sun4i_pwm_calculate(struct sun4i_pwm_chip *sun4i_pwm, >> if (sun4i_pwm->data->has_prescaler_bypass) { >> /* First, test without any prescaler when available */ >> prescaler = PWM_PRESCAL_MASK; >> - pval = 1; >> /* >> * When not using any prescaler, the clock period in nanoseconds >> * is not an integer so round it half up instead of > > Are you sure? It looks used to me. It's only read in a do_div() and before that it is being assigned: pval = prescaler_table[prescaler]; div = clk_rate; do_div(div, pval); so the assigned value of pval = 1 is never read Colin > > regards, > dan carpenter > _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 34+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] pwm: sun4i: redundant assignment to variable pval @ 2019-10-02 13:28 ` Colin Ian King 0 siblings, 0 replies; 34+ messages in thread From: Colin Ian King @ 2019-10-02 13:28 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Dan Carpenter Cc: linux-pwm, kernel-janitors, linux-kernel, Maxime Ripard, Chen-Yu Tsai, Thierry Reding, Uwe Kleine-König, linux-arm-kernel On 02/10/2019 14:25, Dan Carpenter wrote: > On Wed, Oct 02, 2019 at 11:08:44AM +0100, Colin King wrote: >> From: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com> >> >> Variable pval is being assigned a value that is never read. The >> assignment is redundant and hence can be removed. >> >> Addresses-Coverity: ("Unused value") >> Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com> >> --- >> drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c | 1 - >> 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c b/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c >> index 6f5840a1a82d..53970d4ba695 100644 >> --- a/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c >> +++ b/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c >> @@ -156,7 +156,6 @@ static int sun4i_pwm_calculate(struct sun4i_pwm_chip *sun4i_pwm, >> if (sun4i_pwm->data->has_prescaler_bypass) { >> /* First, test without any prescaler when available */ >> prescaler = PWM_PRESCAL_MASK; >> - pval = 1; >> /* >> * When not using any prescaler, the clock period in nanoseconds >> * is not an integer so round it half up instead of > > Are you sure? It looks used to me. It's only read in a do_div() and before that it is being assigned: pval = prescaler_table[prescaler]; div = clk_rate; do_div(div, pval); so the assigned value of pval = 1 is never read Colin > > regards, > dan carpenter > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 34+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] pwm: sun4i: redundant assignment to variable pval @ 2019-10-02 13:28 ` Colin Ian King 0 siblings, 0 replies; 34+ messages in thread From: Colin Ian King @ 2019-10-02 13:28 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Dan Carpenter Cc: linux-pwm, kernel-janitors, linux-kernel, Maxime Ripard, Chen-Yu Tsai, Thierry Reding, Uwe Kleine-König, linux-arm-kernel On 02/10/2019 14:25, Dan Carpenter wrote: > On Wed, Oct 02, 2019 at 11:08:44AM +0100, Colin King wrote: >> From: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com> >> >> Variable pval is being assigned a value that is never read. The >> assignment is redundant and hence can be removed. >> >> Addresses-Coverity: ("Unused value") >> Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com> >> --- >> drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c | 1 - >> 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c b/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c >> index 6f5840a1a82d..53970d4ba695 100644 >> --- a/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c >> +++ b/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c >> @@ -156,7 +156,6 @@ static int sun4i_pwm_calculate(struct sun4i_pwm_chip *sun4i_pwm, >> if (sun4i_pwm->data->has_prescaler_bypass) { >> /* First, test without any prescaler when available */ >> prescaler = PWM_PRESCAL_MASK; >> - pval = 1; >> /* >> * When not using any prescaler, the clock period in nanoseconds >> * is not an integer so round it half up instead of > > Are you sure? It looks used to me. It's only read in a do_div() and before that it is being assigned: pval = prescaler_table[prescaler]; div = clk_rate; do_div(div, pval); so the assigned value of pval = 1 is never read Colin > > regards, > dan carpenter > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 34+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] pwm: sun4i: redundant assignment to variable pval 2019-10-02 13:25 ` Dan Carpenter (?) (?) @ 2019-10-02 13:29 ` Dan Carpenter -1 siblings, 0 replies; 34+ messages in thread From: Dan Carpenter @ 2019-10-02 13:29 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Colin King Cc: Thierry Reding, Uwe Kleine-König, Maxime Ripard, Chen-Yu Tsai, linux-pwm, linux-arm-kernel, kernel-janitors, linux-kernel On Wed, Oct 02, 2019 at 04:25:06PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote: > On Wed, Oct 02, 2019 at 11:08:44AM +0100, Colin King wrote: > > From: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com> > > > > Variable pval is being assigned a value that is never read. The > > assignment is redundant and hence can be removed. > > > > Addresses-Coverity: ("Unused value") > > Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com> > > --- > > drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c | 1 - > > 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c b/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c > > index 6f5840a1a82d..53970d4ba695 100644 > > --- a/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c > > +++ b/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c > > @@ -156,7 +156,6 @@ static int sun4i_pwm_calculate(struct sun4i_pwm_chip *sun4i_pwm, > > if (sun4i_pwm->data->has_prescaler_bypass) { > > /* First, test without any prescaler when available */ > > prescaler = PWM_PRESCAL_MASK; > > - pval = 1; > > /* > > * When not using any prescaler, the clock period in nanoseconds > > * is not an integer so round it half up instead of > > Are you sure? It looks used to me. Ah. Never mind. My tree was out of date. regards, dan carpenter ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 34+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] pwm: sun4i: redundant assignment to variable pval @ 2019-10-02 13:29 ` Dan Carpenter 0 siblings, 0 replies; 34+ messages in thread From: Dan Carpenter @ 2019-10-02 13:29 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Colin King Cc: linux-pwm, kernel-janitors, linux-kernel, Maxime Ripard, Chen-Yu Tsai, Thierry Reding, Uwe Kleine-König, linux-arm-kernel On Wed, Oct 02, 2019 at 04:25:06PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote: > On Wed, Oct 02, 2019 at 11:08:44AM +0100, Colin King wrote: > > From: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com> > > > > Variable pval is being assigned a value that is never read. The > > assignment is redundant and hence can be removed. > > > > Addresses-Coverity: ("Unused value") > > Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com> > > --- > > drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c | 1 - > > 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c b/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c > > index 6f5840a1a82d..53970d4ba695 100644 > > --- a/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c > > +++ b/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c > > @@ -156,7 +156,6 @@ static int sun4i_pwm_calculate(struct sun4i_pwm_chip *sun4i_pwm, > > if (sun4i_pwm->data->has_prescaler_bypass) { > > /* First, test without any prescaler when available */ > > prescaler = PWM_PRESCAL_MASK; > > - pval = 1; > > /* > > * When not using any prescaler, the clock period in nanoseconds > > * is not an integer so round it half up instead of > > Are you sure? It looks used to me. Ah. Never mind. My tree was out of date. regards, dan carpenter _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 34+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] pwm: sun4i: redundant assignment to variable pval @ 2019-10-02 13:29 ` Dan Carpenter 0 siblings, 0 replies; 34+ messages in thread From: Dan Carpenter @ 2019-10-02 13:29 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Colin King Cc: linux-pwm, kernel-janitors, linux-kernel, Maxime Ripard, Chen-Yu Tsai, Thierry Reding, Uwe Kleine-König, linux-arm-kernel On Wed, Oct 02, 2019 at 04:25:06PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote: > On Wed, Oct 02, 2019 at 11:08:44AM +0100, Colin King wrote: > > From: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com> > > > > Variable pval is being assigned a value that is never read. The > > assignment is redundant and hence can be removed. > > > > Addresses-Coverity: ("Unused value") > > Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com> > > --- > > drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c | 1 - > > 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c b/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c > > index 6f5840a1a82d..53970d4ba695 100644 > > --- a/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c > > +++ b/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c > > @@ -156,7 +156,6 @@ static int sun4i_pwm_calculate(struct sun4i_pwm_chip *sun4i_pwm, > > if (sun4i_pwm->data->has_prescaler_bypass) { > > /* First, test without any prescaler when available */ > > prescaler = PWM_PRESCAL_MASK; > > - pval = 1; > > /* > > * When not using any prescaler, the clock period in nanoseconds > > * is not an integer so round it half up instead of > > Are you sure? It looks used to me. Ah. Never mind. My tree was out of date. regards, dan carpenter ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 34+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] pwm: sun4i: redundant assignment to variable pval @ 2019-10-02 13:29 ` Dan Carpenter 0 siblings, 0 replies; 34+ messages in thread From: Dan Carpenter @ 2019-10-02 13:29 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Colin King Cc: linux-pwm, kernel-janitors, linux-kernel, Maxime Ripard, Chen-Yu Tsai, Thierry Reding, Uwe Kleine-König, linux-arm-kernel On Wed, Oct 02, 2019 at 04:25:06PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote: > On Wed, Oct 02, 2019 at 11:08:44AM +0100, Colin King wrote: > > From: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com> > > > > Variable pval is being assigned a value that is never read. The > > assignment is redundant and hence can be removed. > > > > Addresses-Coverity: ("Unused value") > > Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com> > > --- > > drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c | 1 - > > 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c b/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c > > index 6f5840a1a82d..53970d4ba695 100644 > > --- a/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c > > +++ b/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c > > @@ -156,7 +156,6 @@ static int sun4i_pwm_calculate(struct sun4i_pwm_chip *sun4i_pwm, > > if (sun4i_pwm->data->has_prescaler_bypass) { > > /* First, test without any prescaler when available */ > > prescaler = PWM_PRESCAL_MASK; > > - pval = 1; > > /* > > * When not using any prescaler, the clock period in nanoseconds > > * is not an integer so round it half up instead of > > Are you sure? It looks used to me. Ah. Never mind. My tree was out of date. regards, dan carpenter ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 34+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] pwm: sun4i: redundant assignment to variable pval 2019-10-02 13:29 ` Dan Carpenter (?) (?) @ 2019-10-02 13:30 ` Colin Ian King -1 siblings, 0 replies; 34+ messages in thread From: Colin Ian King @ 2019-10-02 13:30 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Dan Carpenter Cc: Thierry Reding, Uwe Kleine-König, Maxime Ripard, Chen-Yu Tsai, linux-pwm, linux-arm-kernel, kernel-janitors, linux-kernel On 02/10/2019 14:29, Dan Carpenter wrote: > On Wed, Oct 02, 2019 at 04:25:06PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote: >> On Wed, Oct 02, 2019 at 11:08:44AM +0100, Colin King wrote: >>> From: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com> >>> >>> Variable pval is being assigned a value that is never read. The >>> assignment is redundant and hence can be removed. >>> >>> Addresses-Coverity: ("Unused value") >>> Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com> >>> --- >>> drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c | 1 - >>> 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c b/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c >>> index 6f5840a1a82d..53970d4ba695 100644 >>> --- a/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c >>> +++ b/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c >>> @@ -156,7 +156,6 @@ static int sun4i_pwm_calculate(struct sun4i_pwm_chip *sun4i_pwm, >>> if (sun4i_pwm->data->has_prescaler_bypass) { >>> /* First, test without any prescaler when available */ >>> prescaler = PWM_PRESCAL_MASK; >>> - pval = 1; >>> /* >>> * When not using any prescaler, the clock period in nanoseconds >>> * is not an integer so round it half up instead of >> >> Are you sure? It looks used to me. > > Ah. Never mind. My tree was out of date. No problem. I appreciated you eyeballing my fixes. > > regards, > dan carpenter > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 34+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] pwm: sun4i: redundant assignment to variable pval @ 2019-10-02 13:30 ` Colin Ian King 0 siblings, 0 replies; 34+ messages in thread From: Colin Ian King @ 2019-10-02 13:30 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Dan Carpenter Cc: linux-pwm, kernel-janitors, linux-kernel, Maxime Ripard, Chen-Yu Tsai, Thierry Reding, Uwe Kleine-König, linux-arm-kernel On 02/10/2019 14:29, Dan Carpenter wrote: > On Wed, Oct 02, 2019 at 04:25:06PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote: >> On Wed, Oct 02, 2019 at 11:08:44AM +0100, Colin King wrote: >>> From: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com> >>> >>> Variable pval is being assigned a value that is never read. The >>> assignment is redundant and hence can be removed. >>> >>> Addresses-Coverity: ("Unused value") >>> Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com> >>> --- >>> drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c | 1 - >>> 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c b/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c >>> index 6f5840a1a82d..53970d4ba695 100644 >>> --- a/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c >>> +++ b/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c >>> @@ -156,7 +156,6 @@ static int sun4i_pwm_calculate(struct sun4i_pwm_chip *sun4i_pwm, >>> if (sun4i_pwm->data->has_prescaler_bypass) { >>> /* First, test without any prescaler when available */ >>> prescaler = PWM_PRESCAL_MASK; >>> - pval = 1; >>> /* >>> * When not using any prescaler, the clock period in nanoseconds >>> * is not an integer so round it half up instead of >> >> Are you sure? It looks used to me. > > Ah. Never mind. My tree was out of date. No problem. I appreciated you eyeballing my fixes. > > regards, > dan carpenter > _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 34+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] pwm: sun4i: redundant assignment to variable pval @ 2019-10-02 13:30 ` Colin Ian King 0 siblings, 0 replies; 34+ messages in thread From: Colin Ian King @ 2019-10-02 13:30 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Dan Carpenter Cc: linux-pwm, kernel-janitors, linux-kernel, Maxime Ripard, Chen-Yu Tsai, Thierry Reding, Uwe Kleine-König, linux-arm-kernel On 02/10/2019 14:29, Dan Carpenter wrote: > On Wed, Oct 02, 2019 at 04:25:06PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote: >> On Wed, Oct 02, 2019 at 11:08:44AM +0100, Colin King wrote: >>> From: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com> >>> >>> Variable pval is being assigned a value that is never read. The >>> assignment is redundant and hence can be removed. >>> >>> Addresses-Coverity: ("Unused value") >>> Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com> >>> --- >>> drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c | 1 - >>> 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c b/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c >>> index 6f5840a1a82d..53970d4ba695 100644 >>> --- a/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c >>> +++ b/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c >>> @@ -156,7 +156,6 @@ static int sun4i_pwm_calculate(struct sun4i_pwm_chip *sun4i_pwm, >>> if (sun4i_pwm->data->has_prescaler_bypass) { >>> /* First, test without any prescaler when available */ >>> prescaler = PWM_PRESCAL_MASK; >>> - pval = 1; >>> /* >>> * When not using any prescaler, the clock period in nanoseconds >>> * is not an integer so round it half up instead of >> >> Are you sure? It looks used to me. > > Ah. Never mind. My tree was out of date. No problem. I appreciated you eyeballing my fixes. > > regards, > dan carpenter > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 34+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] pwm: sun4i: redundant assignment to variable pval @ 2019-10-02 13:30 ` Colin Ian King 0 siblings, 0 replies; 34+ messages in thread From: Colin Ian King @ 2019-10-02 13:30 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Dan Carpenter Cc: linux-pwm, kernel-janitors, linux-kernel, Maxime Ripard, Chen-Yu Tsai, Thierry Reding, Uwe Kleine-König, linux-arm-kernel On 02/10/2019 14:29, Dan Carpenter wrote: > On Wed, Oct 02, 2019 at 04:25:06PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote: >> On Wed, Oct 02, 2019 at 11:08:44AM +0100, Colin King wrote: >>> From: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com> >>> >>> Variable pval is being assigned a value that is never read. The >>> assignment is redundant and hence can be removed. >>> >>> Addresses-Coverity: ("Unused value") >>> Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com> >>> --- >>> drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c | 1 - >>> 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c b/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c >>> index 6f5840a1a82d..53970d4ba695 100644 >>> --- a/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c >>> +++ b/drivers/pwm/pwm-sun4i.c >>> @@ -156,7 +156,6 @@ static int sun4i_pwm_calculate(struct sun4i_pwm_chip *sun4i_pwm, >>> if (sun4i_pwm->data->has_prescaler_bypass) { >>> /* First, test without any prescaler when available */ >>> prescaler = PWM_PRESCAL_MASK; >>> - pval = 1; >>> /* >>> * When not using any prescaler, the clock period in nanoseconds >>> * is not an integer so round it half up instead of >> >> Are you sure? It looks used to me. > > Ah. Never mind. My tree was out of date. No problem. I appreciated you eyeballing my fixes. > > regards, > dan carpenter > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 34+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2019-12-10 10:24 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 34+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2019-10-02 10:08 [PATCH] pwm: sun4i: redundant assignment to variable pval Colin King 2019-10-02 10:08 ` Colin King 2019-10-02 10:08 ` Colin King 2019-10-02 10:16 ` Uwe Kleine-König 2019-10-02 10:16 ` Uwe Kleine-König 2019-10-02 10:16 ` Uwe Kleine-König 2019-12-05 7:24 ` [PATCH] pwm: sun4i: Narrow scope of local variable Uwe Kleine-König 2019-12-05 7:24 ` Uwe Kleine-König 2019-12-05 8:37 ` walter harms 2019-12-05 8:37 ` walter harms 2019-12-10 10:12 ` Uwe Kleine-König 2019-12-10 10:12 ` Uwe Kleine-König 2019-12-10 10:12 ` Uwe Kleine-König 2019-12-10 10:24 ` [PATCH v2] " Uwe Kleine-König 2019-12-10 10:24 ` Uwe Kleine-König 2019-10-02 10:39 ` [PATCH] pwm: sun4i: redundant assignment to variable pval Thierry Reding 2019-10-02 10:39 ` Thierry Reding 2019-10-02 10:39 ` Thierry Reding 2019-10-02 13:25 ` Dan Carpenter 2019-10-02 13:25 ` Dan Carpenter 2019-10-02 13:25 ` Dan Carpenter 2019-10-02 13:25 ` Dan Carpenter 2019-10-02 13:28 ` Colin Ian King 2019-10-02 13:28 ` Colin Ian King 2019-10-02 13:28 ` Colin Ian King 2019-10-02 13:28 ` Colin Ian King 2019-10-02 13:29 ` Dan Carpenter 2019-10-02 13:29 ` Dan Carpenter 2019-10-02 13:29 ` Dan Carpenter 2019-10-02 13:29 ` Dan Carpenter 2019-10-02 13:30 ` Colin Ian King 2019-10-02 13:30 ` Colin Ian King 2019-10-02 13:30 ` Colin Ian King 2019-10-02 13:30 ` Colin Ian King
This is an external index of several public inboxes, see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror all data and code used by this external index.