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;
Date:   Thu, 4 Apr 2019 12:09:00 +0300
From:   Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>
To:     Madhumitha Prabakaran <madhumithabiw@gmail.com>
Cc:     gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, devel@driverdev.osuosl.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] Staging: rtlwifi: Remove unwanted parentheses
Message-ID: <20190404090900.GH32590@kadam>
References: <20190403223851.22524-1-madhumithabiw@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20190403223851.22524-1-madhumithabiw@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

You should probably update the subject line because now it's not just
about parentheses any more.

[PATCH v2] Staging: rtlwifi: clean up crc16_ccitt()

So the one thing per patch rule is a little bit about selling your
patch.  We never allow "Clean up whole_file.c" but we do sometimes allow
"Clean up a function()" so long as the patch description sells it in
the right way.

Blah blah function does "BIT(0) << i" instead of "BIT(i)".  Using !!
is slightly shorter than "foo ? 1 : 0".  Blah blah, etc.

On Wed, Apr 03, 2019 at 05:38:51PM -0500, Madhumitha Prabakaran wrote:
> @@ -351,13 +351,13 @@ static u16 crc16_ccitt(u8 data, u16 crc)
>  		else
>  			result |= BIT(0);
>  
> -		crc_bit11 = ((crc & BIT(11)) ? 1 : 0) ^ shift_in;
> +		crc_bit11 = !!(crc & BIT(11)) ^ shift_in;
>  		if (crc_bit11 == 0)
>  			result &= (~BIT(12));
                                  ^        ^
I thought your Coccinelle script was going to complain about these
parentheses.  Probably the &= confuses it?  There are a couple others
in the same function.

regards,
dan carpenter