Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] pwm: bcm-iproc: Remove impossible comparison when
 validating duty cycle
To:     Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com>,
        Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org>, thierry.reding@gmail.com,
        u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de, linux-pwm@vger.kernel.org
Cc:     linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Ray Jui <rjui@broadcom.com>,
        Scott Branden <sbranden@broadcom.com>,
        Yendapally Reddy Dhananjaya Reddy 
        <yendapally.reddy@broadcom.com>,
        bcm-kernel-feedback-list@broadcom.com
References: <20200629124752.1018358-1-lee.jones@linaro.org>
 <20200629124752.1018358-2-lee.jones@linaro.org>
 <3470e941-aa86-11a8-674b-5258a08fedb1@gmail.com>
From:   Scott Branden <scott.branden@broadcom.com>
Message-ID: <76a657ca-d30e-c5f2-f057-1c1bb7c8e1bf@broadcom.com>
Date:   Mon, 29 Jun 2020 09:54:20 -0700
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/68.8.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <3470e941-aa86-11a8-674b-5258a08fedb1@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Language: en-US
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk


On 2020-06-29 9:45 a.m., Florian Fainelli wrote:
>
> On 6/29/2020 5:47 AM, Lee Jones wrote:
>> 'duty' here is an unsigned int, thus checking for <0 will always
>> evaluate to false.
>>
>> Fixes the following W=1 warning:
>>
>>   drivers/pwm/pwm-bcm-iproc.c:147:12: warning: comparison of unsigned expression < 0 is always false [-Wtype-limits]
>>
>> Cc: Ray Jui <rjui@broadcom.com>
>> Cc: Scott Branden <sbranden@broadcom.com>
>> Cc: Yendapally Reddy Dhananjaya Reddy <yendapally.reddy@broadcom.com>
>> Cc: bcm-kernel-feedback-list@broadcom.com
>> Cc: linux-pwm@vger.kernel.org
>> Signed-off-by: Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org>
> And IPROC_PWM_DUTY_CYCLE_MIN is unused after remove this single use of
> the define, if you also remove it you can add:
>
> Reviewed-by: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com>
We actually made this same change internally recently but hadn't 
upstreamed it yet.

Tested-by: Scott Branden <scott.branden@broadcom.com>