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;
From:   Matt Sickler <Matt.Sickler@daktronics.com>
To:     Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        Harsh Jain <harshjain32@gmail.com>
CC:     "devel@driverdev.osuosl.org" <devel@driverdev.osuosl.org>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] staging:kpc2000:Fix dubious x | !y sparse warning
Thread-Topic: [PATCH] staging:kpc2000:Fix dubious x | !y sparse warning
Thread-Index: AQHVSIcHzcxxBjSjT06bdC+lWh47aqbmq2jA
Date:   Thu, 1 Aug 2019 19:22:13 +0000
Message-ID: <BYAPR02MB400519AC022AB41054C110FDEEDE0@BYAPR02MB4005.namprd02.prod.outlook.com>
References: <20190731183606.2513-1-harshjain32@gmail.com>
 <20190801163437.GA8360@kroah.com>
In-Reply-To: <20190801163437.GA8360@kroah.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: daktronics.com does not designate
 permitted sender hosts)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: e3a99640-0fc6-4af1-8b87-08d716b58ed7
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 01 Aug 2019 19:22:13.6037
 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: be88af81-0945-42aa-a3d2-b122777351a2
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: matt.sickler@daktronics.com
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BYAPR02MB4984
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

>-----Original Message-----
>From: devel <driverdev-devel-bounces@linuxdriverproject.org> On Behalf Of =
Greg KH
>Sent: Thursday, August 01, 2019 11:35 AM
>To: Harsh Jain <harshjain32@gmail.com>
>Cc: devel@driverdev.osuosl.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
>Subject: Re: [PATCH] staging:kpc2000:Fix dubious x | !y sparse warning
>
>On Thu, Aug 01, 2019 at 12:06:06AM +0530, Harsh Jain wrote:
>> Bitwise OR(|) operation with 0 always yield same result.
>> It fixes dubious x | !y sparse warning.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Harsh Jain <harshjain32@gmail.com>
>> ---
>>  drivers/staging/kpc2000/kpc2000_i2c.c | 16 +---------------
>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 15 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/staging/kpc2000/kpc2000_i2c.c b/drivers/staging/kpc=
2000/kpc2000_i2c.c
>> index b108da4..5f027d7c 100644
>> --- a/drivers/staging/kpc2000/kpc2000_i2c.c
>> +++ b/drivers/staging/kpc2000/kpc2000_i2c.c
>> @@ -536,29 +536,15 @@ static u32 i801_func(struct i2c_adapter *adapter)
>>
>>       u32 f =3D
>>               I2C_FUNC_I2C                     | /* 0x00000001 (I enable=
d this one) */
>> -             !I2C_FUNC_10BIT_ADDR             | /* 0x00000002 */
>> -             !I2C_FUNC_PROTOCOL_MANGLING      | /* 0x00000004 */
>>               ((priv->features & FEATURE_SMBUS_PEC) ? I2C_FUNC_SMBUS_PEC=
 : 0) | /* 0x00000008 */
>> -             !I2C_FUNC_SMBUS_BLOCK_PROC_CALL  | /* 0x00008000 */
>>               I2C_FUNC_SMBUS_QUICK             | /* 0x00010000 */
>> -             !I2C_FUNC_SMBUS_READ_BYTE        | /* 0x00020000 */
>> -             !I2C_FUNC_SMBUS_WRITE_BYTE       | /* 0x00040000 */
>> -             !I2C_FUNC_SMBUS_READ_BYTE_DATA   | /* 0x00080000 */
>> -             !I2C_FUNC_SMBUS_WRITE_BYTE_DATA  | /* 0x00100000 */
>> -             !I2C_FUNC_SMBUS_READ_WORD_DATA   | /* 0x00200000 */
>> -             !I2C_FUNC_SMBUS_WRITE_WORD_DATA  | /* 0x00400000 */
>> -             !I2C_FUNC_SMBUS_PROC_CALL        | /* 0x00800000 */
>> -             !I2C_FUNC_SMBUS_READ_BLOCK_DATA  | /* 0x01000000 */
>> -             !I2C_FUNC_SMBUS_WRITE_BLOCK_DATA | /* 0x02000000 */
>
>This is ok, it is showing you that these bits are explicitly being not
>set.  Which is good, now you can go through the list and see that all
>are accounted for.
>
>So I think this should stay as-is, thanks.

I was going to say the same thing, but I didn't know what the kernel style =
guideline was.
Would Linus prefer this style or would commenting them out be preferred?
Seems like the sparse warnings means the current style is not acceptable?