From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Arnd Bergmann Subject: Re: [PATCH 14/14] [media] fix warning on v4l2_subdev_call() result interpreted as bool Date: Fri, 14 Jul 2017 21:32:25 +0200 Message-ID: References: <20170714092540.1217397-1-arnd@arndb.de> <20170714093938.1469319-1-arnd@arndb.de> <20170714120512.ioe67nnloqivtbr7@mwanda> <20170714125525.kjemhcn4poon6r3i@mwanda> <20170714130955.zqe26g6zpixr3xj2@mwanda> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20170714130955.zqe26g6zpixr3xj2@mwanda> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dri-devel-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org Sender: "dri-devel" To: Dan Carpenter Cc: devel@driverdev.osuosl.org, Linux-Renesas , Linux Media Mailing List , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Daeseok Youn , Linus Torvalds , Linux Kernel Mailing List , dri-devel , adi-buildroot-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, Hans Verkuil , IDE-ML , Guenter Roeck , =?UTF-8?Q?Niklas_S=C3=B6derlund?= , Tejun Heo , Andrew Morton , Mauro Carvalho Chehab , Robert Jarzmik , Linux ARM , Alan Cox List-Id: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org T24gRnJpLCBKdWwgMTQsIDIwMTcgYXQgMzowOSBQTSwgRGFuIENhcnBlbnRlciA8ZGFuLmNhcnBl bnRlckBvcmFjbGUuY29tPiB3cm90ZToKPiBPbiBGcmksIEp1bCAxNCwgMjAxNyBhdCAwMzo1NToy NlBNICswMzAwLCBEYW4gQ2FycGVudGVyIHdyb3RlOgo+PiBJIGRvbid0IGFncmVlIHdpdGggaXQg YXMgYSBzdGF0aWMgYW5hbHlzaXMgZGV2Li4uCj4KPiBXaGF0IEkgbWVhbiBpcyBpZiBpdCdzIGEg bWFjcm8gdGhhdCByZXR1cm5zIC1FTk9ERVYgb3IgYSBmdW5jdGlvbiB0aGF0Cj4gcmV0dXJucyAt RU5PREVWLCB0aGV5IHNob3VsZCBib3RoIGJlIHRyZWF0ZWQgdGhlIHNhbWUuICBUaGUgb3RoZXIK PiB3YXJuaW5ncyB0aGlzIGNoZWNrIHByaW50cyBhcmUgcXVpdGUgY2xldmVyLgoKSSB0aGluayB0 aGlzIGlzIHdoYXQgZ2NjIHRyaWVzIHRvIGRvLCBhbmQgaXQgc2hvdWxkIHdvcmsgbm9ybWFsbHks IGJ1dCBpdApmYWlscyB3aGVuIHVzaW5nIGNjYWNoZS4gSSBrbm93IEkgaGFkIGNhc2VzIGxpa2Ug dGhhdCwgbm90IGVudGlyZWx5IHN1cmUKaWYgdGhpcyBpcyBvbmUgb2YgdGhlbS4gTWF5YmUgaXQg anVzdCBtZWFucyBJIHNob3VsZCBnaXZlIHVwIG9uIHVzaW5nCmNjYWNoZSBpbiBwcmVwcm9jZXNz b3IgbW9kZS4KCiAgICAgICBBcm5kCl9fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fCmRyaS1kZXZlbCBtYWlsaW5nIGxpc3QKZHJpLWRldmVsQGxpc3RzLmZyZWVk ZXNrdG9wLm9yZwpodHRwczovL2xpc3RzLmZyZWVkZXNrdG9wLm9yZy9tYWlsbWFuL2xpc3RpbmZv L2RyaS1kZXZlbAo= From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751131AbdGNTc3 (ORCPT ); Fri, 14 Jul 2017 15:32:29 -0400 Received: from mail-oi0-f66.google.com ([209.85.218.66]:32822 "EHLO mail-oi0-f66.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750786AbdGNTc1 (ORCPT ); Fri, 14 Jul 2017 15:32:27 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20170714130955.zqe26g6zpixr3xj2@mwanda> References: <20170714092540.1217397-1-arnd@arndb.de> <20170714093938.1469319-1-arnd@arndb.de> <20170714120512.ioe67nnloqivtbr7@mwanda> <20170714125525.kjemhcn4poon6r3i@mwanda> <20170714130955.zqe26g6zpixr3xj2@mwanda> From: Arnd Bergmann Date: Fri, 14 Jul 2017 21:32:25 +0200 X-Google-Sender-Auth: iCPNa0LT28KE_frprHWnDZg8sBI Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 14/14] [media] fix warning on v4l2_subdev_call() result interpreted as bool To: Dan Carpenter Cc: devel@driverdev.osuosl.org, Hans Verkuil , Alan Cox , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Daeseok Youn , Linux Kernel Mailing List , dri-devel , adi-buildroot-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, Linux-Renesas , IDE-ML , Robert Jarzmik , Linux ARM , =?UTF-8?Q?Niklas_S=C3=B6derlund?= , Tejun Heo , Andrew Morton , Mauro Carvalho Chehab , Linus Torvalds , Guenter Roeck , Linux Media Mailing List Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Jul 14, 2017 at 3:09 PM, Dan Carpenter wrote: > On Fri, Jul 14, 2017 at 03:55:26PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote: >> I don't agree with it as a static analysis dev... > > What I mean is if it's a macro that returns -ENODEV or a function that > returns -ENODEV, they should both be treated the same. The other > warnings this check prints are quite clever. I think this is what gcc tries to do, and it should work normally, but it fails when using ccache. I know I had cases like that, not entirely sure if this is one of them. Maybe it just means I should give up on using ccache in preprocessor mode. Arnd From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: arnd@arndb.de (Arnd Bergmann) Date: Fri, 14 Jul 2017 21:32:25 +0200 Subject: [PATCH 14/14] [media] fix warning on v4l2_subdev_call() result interpreted as bool In-Reply-To: <20170714130955.zqe26g6zpixr3xj2@mwanda> References: <20170714092540.1217397-1-arnd@arndb.de> <20170714093938.1469319-1-arnd@arndb.de> <20170714120512.ioe67nnloqivtbr7@mwanda> <20170714125525.kjemhcn4poon6r3i@mwanda> <20170714130955.zqe26g6zpixr3xj2@mwanda> Message-ID: To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Fri, Jul 14, 2017 at 3:09 PM, Dan Carpenter wrote: > On Fri, Jul 14, 2017 at 03:55:26PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote: >> I don't agree with it as a static analysis dev... > > What I mean is if it's a macro that returns -ENODEV or a function that > returns -ENODEV, they should both be treated the same. The other > warnings this check prints are quite clever. I think this is what gcc tries to do, and it should work normally, but it fails when using ccache. I know I had cases like that, not entirely sure if this is one of them. Maybe it just means I should give up on using ccache in preprocessor mode. Arnd