Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <df124c8f-7c71-7941-9969-977dd19c7d1b@samsung.com>
References: <1521213399-31947-1-git-send-email-jacopo+renesas@jmondi.org>
 <1521213399-31947-3-git-send-email-jacopo+renesas@jmondi.org>
 <CGME20180327062437epcas5p3389cb070d15669febeb6f504cff2cf6f@epcas5p3.samsung.com>
 <30381869-9bc8-b6aa-a37a-598d9c8f280d@mentor.com> <df124c8f-7c71-7941-9969-977dd19c7d1b@samsung.com>
From:   Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>
Date:   Tue, 27 Mar 2018 09:36:15 +0200
Message-ID: <CAMuHMdVWJhmxXS+mvuwjrCOzurArFurqKwQ2PJD-eRCqbLRAng@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 2/3] drm: bridge: Add thc63lvd1024 LVDS decoder driver
To:     Andrzej Hajda <a.hajda@samsung.com>
Cc:     Vladimir Zapolskiy <vladimir_zapolskiy@mentor.com>,
        Jacopo Mondi <jacopo+renesas@jmondi.org>,
        Archit Taneja <architt@codeaurora.org>,
        Laurent Pinchart <Laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com>,
        David Airlie <airlied@linux.ie>,
        Simon Horman <horms@verge.net.au>,
        Magnus Damm <magnus.damm@gmail.com>,
        =?UTF-8?Q?Niklas_S=C3=B6derlund?= <niklas.soderlund@ragnatech.se>,
        Sergei Shtylyov <sergei.shtylyov@cogentembedded.com>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
        DRI Development <dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org>,
        Linux-Renesas <linux-renesas-soc@vger.kernel.org>,
        "open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS" 
        <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

Hi Andrzej,

On Tue, Mar 27, 2018 at 9:28 AM, Andrzej Hajda <a.hajda@samsung.com> wrote:
>>> --- /dev/null
>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/thc63lvd1024.c

>>> +static void thc63_enable(struct drm_bridge *bridge)
>>> +{
>>> +    struct thc63_dev *thc63 = to_thc63(bridge);
>>> +    struct regulator *vcc;
>>> +    int i;
>> unsigned int i;
>
> Why? You are introducing silly bug this way, see few lines below.
>
>>
>>> +
>>> +    for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(thc63->vccs); i++) {
>>> +            vcc = thc63->vccs[i];
>>> +            if (!vcc)
>>> +                    continue;
>>> +
>>> +            if (regulator_enable(vcc))
>>> +                    goto error_vcc_enable;
>>> +    }
>>> +
>>> +    if (thc63->pdwn)
>>> +            gpiod_set_value(thc63->pdwn, 0);
>>> +
>>> +    if (thc63->oe)
>>> +            gpiod_set_value(thc63->oe, 1);
>>> +
>>> +    return;
>>> +
>>> +error_vcc_enable:
>>> +    dev_err(thc63->dev, "Failed to enable regulator %s\n",
>>> +            thc63_reg_names[i]);
>>> +
>>> +    for (i = i - 1; i >= 0; i--) {
>
> Here, the loop will not end if you define i unsigned.

True.

> I know one can change the loop, to make it working with unsigned. But
> this clearly shows that using unsigned is more risky.
> What are advantages of unsigned vs int in this case. Are there some
> guidelines/discussions about it?

Some people consider signed integers harmful, as they may be converted
silently by the compiler to the "larger" unsigned type when needed.

Gr{oetje,eeting}s,

                        Geert

-- 
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org

In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
                                -- Linus Torvalds