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;
Message-ID: <26e1929386babea33d4a320b506c5247caacde77.camel@perches.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] HID: ft260: fix format type warning in ft260_word_show()
From:   Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>
To:     Michael Zaidman <michael.zaidman@gmail.com>, lkp@intel.com
Cc:     kbuild-all@lists.01.org, clang-built-linux@googlegroups.com,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, jikos@kernel.org,
        dan.carpenter@oracle.com, linux-input@vger.kernel.org
Date:   Sun, 09 May 2021 13:39:29 -0700
In-Reply-To: <20210509193213.5974-1-michael.zaidman@gmail.com>
References: <202105060637.LeEC6ztp-lkp@intel.com>
         <20210509193213.5974-1-michael.zaidman@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
User-Agent: Evolution 3.38.1-1 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Precedence: bulk

On Sun, 2021-05-09 at 22:32 +0300, Michael Zaidman wrote:
> Fixes: 6a82582d9fa4 ("HID: ft260: add usb hid to i2c host bridge driver")
> 
> Fix warning reported by static analysis when built with W=1 for arm64 by
> clang version 13.0.0
> 
> > > drivers/hid/hid-ft260.c:794:44: warning: format specifies type 'short' but
> ???the argument has type 'int' [-Wformat]
> ???????????return scnprintf(buf, PAGE_SIZE, "%hi\n", le16_to_cpu(*field));
> ?????????????????????????????????????????????~~~     ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> ?????????????????????????????????????????????%i
> ???include/linux/byteorder/generic.h:91:21: note: expanded from
> ????????????????????????????????????????????macro 'le16_to_cpu'
> ???#define le16_to_cpu __le16_to_cpu
> ???????????????????????^
> ???include/uapi/linux/byteorder/big_endian.h:36:26: note: expanded from
> ????????????????????????????????????????????????????macro '__le16_to_cpu'
> ???#define __le16_to_cpu(x) __swab16((__force __u16)(__le16)(x))
> ????????????????????????????^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> ???include/uapi/linux/swab.h:105:2: note: expanded from macro '__swab16'
> ???????????(__builtin_constant_p((__u16)(x)) ?     \
> ???????????^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> 
> Signed-off-by: Michael Zaidman <michael.zaidman@gmail.com>
> Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>
> ---
> ?drivers/hid/hid-ft260.c | 2 +-
> ?1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/hid/hid-ft260.c b/drivers/hid/hid-ft260.c
> index 047aa85a7c83..38794a29599c 100644
> --- a/drivers/hid/hid-ft260.c
> +++ b/drivers/hid/hid-ft260.c
> @@ -791,7 +791,7 @@ static int ft260_word_show(struct hid_device *hdev, int id, u8 *cfg, int len,
> ?	if (ret != len && ret >= 0)
> ?		return -EIO;
> ?
> 
> -	return scnprintf(buf, PAGE_SIZE, "%hi\n", le16_to_cpu(*field));
> +	return scnprintf(buf, PAGE_SIZE, "%d\n", le16_to_cpu(*field));
> ?}

There are 2 of these so I wonder about the static analysis.
It's probably better to use sysfs_emit as well.
---
 drivers/hid/hid-ft260.c | 4 ++--
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/hid/hid-ft260.c b/drivers/hid/hid-ft260.c
index 7a9ba984a75a..475641682fff 100644
--- a/drivers/hid/hid-ft260.c
+++ b/drivers/hid/hid-ft260.c
@@ -783,7 +783,7 @@ static int ft260_byte_show(struct hid_device *hdev, int id, u8 *cfg, int len,
 	if (ret != len && ret >= 0)
 		return -EIO;
 
-	return scnprintf(buf, PAGE_SIZE, "%hi\n", *field);
+	return sysfs_emit(buf, "%d\n", *field);
 }
 
 static int ft260_word_show(struct hid_device *hdev, int id, u8 *cfg, int len,
@@ -795,7 +795,7 @@ static int ft260_word_show(struct hid_device *hdev, int id, u8 *cfg, int len,
 	if (ret != len && ret >= 0)
 		return -EIO;
 
-	return scnprintf(buf, PAGE_SIZE, "%hi\n", le16_to_cpu(*field));
+	return sysfs_emit(buf, "%d\n", le16_to_cpu(*field));
 }
 
 #define FT260_ATTR_SHOW(name, reptype, id, type, func)			       \