2003-03-03 05:32:11

by John Levon

Subject: [PATCH] Another bitop on boolean in pnpbios

First obvious case from -Wbitop-boolean

Not tested ...

regards,
john


--- linux-linus/include/linux/pnpbios.h 2003-01-13 22:43:41.000000000 +0000
+++ linux/include/linux/pnpbios.h 2003-03-03 05:46:42.000000000 +0000
@@ -86,7 +86,7 @@
#define PNPBIOS_DOCK 0x0020
#define PNPBIOS_REMOVABLE 0x0040
#define pnpbios_is_static(x) ((x)->flags & 0x0100) == 0x0000
-#define pnpbios_is_dynamic(x) (x)->flags & 0x0080
+#define pnpbios_is_dynamic(x) ((x)->flags & 0x0080)

/* 0x8000 through 0xffff are OEM defined */

2003-03-03 09:46:35

by William Lee Irwin III

Subject: Re: [PATCH] Another bitop on boolean in pnpbios

On Mon, Mar 03, 2003 at 05:42:35AM +0000, John Levon wrote:
> #define pnpbios_is_static(x) ((x)->flags & 0x0100) == 0x0000
> -#define pnpbios_is_dynamic(x) (x)->flags & 0x0080
> +#define pnpbios_is_dynamic(x) ((x)->flags & 0x0080)

pnpbios_is_static() could probably use the same treatment.


-- wli

2003-03-03 20:15:09

by John Levon

Subject: Re: [PATCH] Another bitop on boolean in pnpbios

On Mon, Mar 03, 2003 at 01:56:43AM -0800, William Lee Irwin III wrote:

> pnpbios_is_static() could probably use the same treatment.

Sure. Linus, at least one of the below actually broke...

regards
john

--- linux-linus/include/linux/pnpbios.h 2003-01-13 22:43:41.000000000 +0000
+++ linux/include/linux/pnpbios.h 2003-03-03 20:28:43.000000000 +0000
@@ -85,8 +85,8 @@
#define PNPBIOS_BOOTABLE 0x0010
#define PNPBIOS_DOCK 0x0020
#define PNPBIOS_REMOVABLE 0x0040
-#define pnpbios_is_static(x) ((x)->flags & 0x0100) == 0x0000
-#define pnpbios_is_dynamic(x) (x)->flags & 0x0080
+#define pnpbios_is_static(x) (((x)->flags & 0x0100) == 0x0000)
+#define pnpbios_is_dynamic(x) ((x)->flags & 0x0080)

/* 0x8000 through 0xffff are OEM defined */