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:   Tue, 15 Oct 2019 09:13:12 +0200
From:   Simon Horman <simon.horman@netronome.com>
To:     Jeroen Hofstee <jhofstee@victronenergy.com>
Cc:     kbuild test robot <lkp@intel.com>,
        Pankaj Sharma <pankj.sharma@samsung.com>,
        "kbuild-all@lists.01.org" <kbuild-all@lists.01.org>,
        "linux-can@vger.kernel.org" <linux-can@vger.kernel.org>,
        "netdev@vger.kernel.org" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "wg@grandegger.com" <wg@grandegger.com>,
        "mkl@pengutronix.de" <mkl@pengutronix.de>,
        "davem@davemloft.net" <davem@davemloft.net>,
        "eugen.hristev@microchip.com" <eugen.hristev@microchip.com>,
        "ludovic.desroches@microchip.com" <ludovic.desroches@microchip.com>,
        "pankaj.dubey@samsung.com" <pankaj.dubey@samsung.com>,
        "rcsekar@samsung.com" <rcsekar@samsung.com>,
        Sriram Dash <sriram.dash@samsung.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] can: m_can: fix boolreturn.cocci warnings
Message-ID: <20191015071311.yssgqhoax46lfa7l@netronome.com>
References: <1571052844-22633-1-git-send-email-pankj.sharma@samsung.com>
 <20191014150428.xhhc43ovkxm6oxf2@332d0cec05f4>
 <20191015055718.mypn63s2ovgwipk3@netronome.com>
 <9ad7810b-2205-3227-7ef9-0272f3714839@victronenergy.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <9ad7810b-2205-3227-7ef9-0272f3714839@victronenergy.com>
User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170113 (1.7.2)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Oct 15, 2019 at 06:37:54AM +0000, Jeroen Hofstee wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On 10/15/19 7:57 AM, Simon Horman wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 14, 2019 at 11:04:28PM +0800, kbuild test robot wrote:
> >> From: kbuild test robot <lkp@intel.com>
> >>
> >> drivers/net/can/m_can/m_can.c:783:9-10: WARNING: return of 0/1 in function 'is_protocol_err' with return type bool
> >>
> >>   Return statements in functions returning bool should use
> >>   true/false instead of 1/0.
> >> Generated by: scripts/coccinelle/misc/boolreturn.cocci
> >>
> >> Fixes: 46946163ac61 ("can: m_can: add support for handling arbitration error")
> >> CC: Pankaj Sharma <pankj.sharma@samsung.com>
> >> Signed-off-by: kbuild test robot <lkp@intel.com>
> >> ---
> >>
> >> url:    https://github.com/0day-ci/linux/commits/Pankaj-Sharma/can-m_can-add-support-for-handling-arbitration-error/20191014-193532
> >>
> >>   m_can.c |    4 ++--
> >>   1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >>
> >> --- a/drivers/net/can/m_can/m_can.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/net/can/m_can/m_can.c
> >> @@ -780,9 +780,9 @@ static inline bool is_lec_err(u32 psr)
> >>   static inline bool is_protocol_err(u32 irqstatus)
> >>   {
> >>   	if (irqstatus & IR_ERR_LEC_31X)
> >> -		return 1;
> >> +		return true;
> >>   	else
> >> -		return 0;
> >> +		return false;
> >>   }
> >>   
> >>   static int m_can_handle_protocol_error(struct net_device *dev, u32 irqstatus)
> >>
> > <2c>
> > Perhaps the following is a nicer way to express this (completely untested):
> >
> > 	return !!(irqstatus & IR_ERR_LEC_31X);
> > </2c>
> 
> 
> Really...., !! for bool / _Bool types? why not simply:
> 
> static inline bool is_protocol_err(u32 irqstatus)
> 	return irqstatus & IR_ERR_LEC_31X;
> }

Good point, silly me.