[PATCH] staging: vme_user: fix check unnecessary parentheses

[PATCH] staging: vme_user: fix check unnecessary parentheses

[Alexon Oliveira]

Fixed all CHECK: Unnecessary parentheses around
as reported by checkpatch to adhere to the Linux kernel
coding-style guidelines.

Signed-off-by: Alexon Oliveira <alexondunkan@gmail.com>
---
 drivers/staging/vme_user/vme.c | 18 +++++++++---------
 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/staging/vme_user/vme.c b/drivers/staging/vme_user/vme.c
index c7c50406c199..6f08bb21369d 100644
--- a/drivers/staging/vme_user/vme.c
+++ b/drivers/staging/vme_user/vme.c
@@ -307,7 +307,7 @@ struct vme_resource *vme_slave_request(struct vme_dev *vdev, u32 address,
 		mutex_lock(&slave_image->mtx);
 		if (((slave_image->address_attr & address) == address) &&
 		    ((slave_image->cycle_attr & cycle) == cycle) &&
-		    (slave_image->locked == 0)) {
+		    slave_image->locked == 0) {
 			slave_image->locked = 1;
 			mutex_unlock(&slave_image->mtx);
 			allocated_image = slave_image;
@@ -508,7 +508,7 @@ struct vme_resource *vme_master_request(struct vme_dev *vdev, u32 address,
 		if (((master_image->address_attr & address) == address) &&
 		    ((master_image->cycle_attr & cycle) == cycle) &&
 		    ((master_image->width_attr & dwidth) == dwidth) &&
-		    (master_image->locked == 0)) {
+		    master_image->locked == 0) {
 			master_image->locked = 1;
 			spin_unlock(&master_image->lock);
 			allocated_image = master_image;
@@ -882,7 +882,7 @@ struct vme_resource *vme_dma_request(struct vme_dev *vdev, u32 route)
 		/* Find an unlocked and compatible controller */
 		mutex_lock(&dma_ctrlr->mtx);
 		if (((dma_ctrlr->route_attr & route) == route) &&
-		    (dma_ctrlr->locked == 0)) {
+		    dma_ctrlr->locked == 0) {
 			dma_ctrlr->locked = 1;
 			mutex_unlock(&dma_ctrlr->mtx);
 			allocated_ctrlr = dma_ctrlr;
@@ -1248,9 +1248,9 @@ void vme_bus_error_handler(struct vme_bridge *bridge,
 	list_for_each(handler_pos, &bridge->vme_error_handlers) {
 		handler = list_entry(handler_pos, struct vme_error_handler,
 				     list);
-		if ((aspace == handler->aspace) &&
-		    (address >= handler->start) &&
-		    (address < handler->end)) {
+		if (aspace == handler->aspace &&
+		    address >= handler->start &&
+		    address < handler->end) {
 			if (!handler->num_errors)
 				handler->first_error = address;
 			if (handler->num_errors != UINT_MAX)
@@ -1337,7 +1337,7 @@ int vme_irq_request(struct vme_dev *vdev, int level, int statid,
 		return -EINVAL;
 	}
 
-	if ((level < 1) || (level > 7)) {
+	if (level < 1 || level > 7) {
 		printk(KERN_ERR "Invalid interrupt level\n");
 		return -EINVAL;
 	}
@@ -1386,7 +1386,7 @@ void vme_irq_free(struct vme_dev *vdev, int level, int statid)
 		return;
 	}
 
-	if ((level < 1) || (level > 7)) {
+	if (level < 1 || level > 7) {
 		printk(KERN_ERR "Invalid interrupt level\n");
 		return;
 	}
@@ -1433,7 +1433,7 @@ int vme_irq_generate(struct vme_dev *vdev, int level, int statid)
 		return -EINVAL;
 	}
 
-	if ((level < 1) || (level > 7)) {
+	if (level < 1 || level > 7) {
 		printk(KERN_WARNING "Invalid interrupt level\n");
 		return -EINVAL;
 	}
-- 
2.41.0

Re: [PATCH] staging: vme_user: fix check unnecessary parentheses

[Greg KH]

On Mon, Aug 14, 2023 at 05:08:19PM -0300, Alexon Oliveira wrote:
> Fixed all CHECK: Unnecessary parentheses around
> as reported by checkpatch to adhere to the Linux kernel
> coding-style guidelines.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Alexon Oliveira <alexondunkan@gmail.com>
> ---
>  drivers/staging/vme_user/vme.c | 18 +++++++++---------
>  1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/vme_user/vme.c b/drivers/staging/vme_user/vme.c
> index c7c50406c199..6f08bb21369d 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/vme_user/vme.c
> +++ b/drivers/staging/vme_user/vme.c
> @@ -307,7 +307,7 @@ struct vme_resource *vme_slave_request(struct vme_dev *vdev, u32 address,
>  		mutex_lock(&slave_image->mtx);
>  		if (((slave_image->address_attr & address) == address) &&
>  		    ((slave_image->cycle_attr & cycle) == cycle) &&
> -		    (slave_image->locked == 0)) {
> +		    slave_image->locked == 0) {
>  			slave_image->locked = 1;
>  			mutex_unlock(&slave_image->mtx);
>  			allocated_image = slave_image;
> @@ -508,7 +508,7 @@ struct vme_resource *vme_master_request(struct vme_dev *vdev, u32 address,
>  		if (((master_image->address_attr & address) == address) &&
>  		    ((master_image->cycle_attr & cycle) == cycle) &&
>  		    ((master_image->width_attr & dwidth) == dwidth) &&
> -		    (master_image->locked == 0)) {
> +		    master_image->locked == 0) {
>  			master_image->locked = 1;
>  			spin_unlock(&master_image->lock);
>  			allocated_image = master_image;
> @@ -882,7 +882,7 @@ struct vme_resource *vme_dma_request(struct vme_dev *vdev, u32 route)
>  		/* Find an unlocked and compatible controller */
>  		mutex_lock(&dma_ctrlr->mtx);
>  		if (((dma_ctrlr->route_attr & route) == route) &&
> -		    (dma_ctrlr->locked == 0)) {
> +		    dma_ctrlr->locked == 0) {
>  			dma_ctrlr->locked = 1;
>  			mutex_unlock(&dma_ctrlr->mtx);
>  			allocated_ctrlr = dma_ctrlr;
> @@ -1248,9 +1248,9 @@ void vme_bus_error_handler(struct vme_bridge *bridge,
>  	list_for_each(handler_pos, &bridge->vme_error_handlers) {
>  		handler = list_entry(handler_pos, struct vme_error_handler,
>  				     list);
> -		if ((aspace == handler->aspace) &&
> -		    (address >= handler->start) &&
> -		    (address < handler->end)) {
> +		if (aspace == handler->aspace &&
> +		    address >= handler->start &&
> +		    address < handler->end) {
>  			if (!handler->num_errors)
>  				handler->first_error = address;
>  			if (handler->num_errors != UINT_MAX)
> @@ -1337,7 +1337,7 @@ int vme_irq_request(struct vme_dev *vdev, int level, int statid,
>  		return -EINVAL;
>  	}
>  
> -	if ((level < 1) || (level > 7)) {
> +	if (level < 1 || level > 7) {
>  		printk(KERN_ERR "Invalid interrupt level\n");
>  		return -EINVAL;
>  	}
> @@ -1386,7 +1386,7 @@ void vme_irq_free(struct vme_dev *vdev, int level, int statid)
>  		return;
>  	}
>  
> -	if ((level < 1) || (level > 7)) {
> +	if (level < 1 || level > 7) {
>  		printk(KERN_ERR "Invalid interrupt level\n");
>  		return;
>  	}
> @@ -1433,7 +1433,7 @@ int vme_irq_generate(struct vme_dev *vdev, int level, int statid)
>  		return -EINVAL;
>  	}
>  
> -	if ((level < 1) || (level > 7)) {
> +	if (level < 1 || level > 7) {
>  		printk(KERN_WARNING "Invalid interrupt level\n");
>  		return -EINVAL;
>  	}
> -- 
> 2.41.0
> 
> 

Hi,

This is the friendly patch-bot of Greg Kroah-Hartman.  You have sent him
a patch that has triggered this response.  He used to manually respond
to these common problems, but in order to save his sanity (he kept
writing the same thing over and over, yet to different people), I was
created.  Hopefully you will not take offence and will fix the problem
in your patch and resubmit it so that it can be accepted into the Linux
kernel tree.

You are receiving this message because of the following common error(s)
as indicated below:

- You sent a patch that has been sent multiple times in the past few
  days, and is the same type to ones that has been recently rejected.
  Please always look at the mailing list traffic to determine if you are
  duplicating other people's work.

If you wish to discuss this problem further, or you have questions about
how to resolve this issue, please feel free to respond to this email and
Greg will reply once he has dug out from the pending patches received
from other developers.

thanks,

greg k-h's patch email bot

Re: [PATCH] staging: vme_user: fix check unnecessary parentheses

[Alexon Oliveira]

On Mon, Aug 14, 2023 at 10:16:03PM +0200, Greg KH wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 14, 2023 at 05:08:19PM -0300, Alexon Oliveira wrote:
> > Fixed all CHECK: Unnecessary parentheses around
> > as reported by checkpatch to adhere to the Linux kernel
> > coding-style guidelines.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Alexon Oliveira <alexondunkan@gmail.com>
> > ---
> >  drivers/staging/vme_user/vme.c | 18 +++++++++---------
> >  1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/staging/vme_user/vme.c b/drivers/staging/vme_user/vme.c
> > index c7c50406c199..6f08bb21369d 100644
> > --- a/drivers/staging/vme_user/vme.c
> > +++ b/drivers/staging/vme_user/vme.c
> > @@ -307,7 +307,7 @@ struct vme_resource *vme_slave_request(struct vme_dev *vdev, u32 address,
> >  		mutex_lock(&slave_image->mtx);
> >  		if (((slave_image->address_attr & address) == address) &&
> >  		    ((slave_image->cycle_attr & cycle) == cycle) &&
> > -		    (slave_image->locked == 0)) {
> > +		    slave_image->locked == 0) {
> >  			slave_image->locked = 1;
> >  			mutex_unlock(&slave_image->mtx);
> >  			allocated_image = slave_image;
> > @@ -508,7 +508,7 @@ struct vme_resource *vme_master_request(struct vme_dev *vdev, u32 address,
> >  		if (((master_image->address_attr & address) == address) &&
> >  		    ((master_image->cycle_attr & cycle) == cycle) &&
> >  		    ((master_image->width_attr & dwidth) == dwidth) &&
> > -		    (master_image->locked == 0)) {
> > +		    master_image->locked == 0) {
> >  			master_image->locked = 1;
> >  			spin_unlock(&master_image->lock);
> >  			allocated_image = master_image;
> > @@ -882,7 +882,7 @@ struct vme_resource *vme_dma_request(struct vme_dev *vdev, u32 route)
> >  		/* Find an unlocked and compatible controller */
> >  		mutex_lock(&dma_ctrlr->mtx);
> >  		if (((dma_ctrlr->route_attr & route) == route) &&
> > -		    (dma_ctrlr->locked == 0)) {
> > +		    dma_ctrlr->locked == 0) {
> >  			dma_ctrlr->locked = 1;
> >  			mutex_unlock(&dma_ctrlr->mtx);
> >  			allocated_ctrlr = dma_ctrlr;
> > @@ -1248,9 +1248,9 @@ void vme_bus_error_handler(struct vme_bridge *bridge,
> >  	list_for_each(handler_pos, &bridge->vme_error_handlers) {
> >  		handler = list_entry(handler_pos, struct vme_error_handler,
> >  				     list);
> > -		if ((aspace == handler->aspace) &&
> > -		    (address >= handler->start) &&
> > -		    (address < handler->end)) {
> > +		if (aspace == handler->aspace &&
> > +		    address >= handler->start &&
> > +		    address < handler->end) {
> >  			if (!handler->num_errors)
> >  				handler->first_error = address;
> >  			if (handler->num_errors != UINT_MAX)
> > @@ -1337,7 +1337,7 @@ int vme_irq_request(struct vme_dev *vdev, int level, int statid,
> >  		return -EINVAL;
> >  	}
> >  
> > -	if ((level < 1) || (level > 7)) {
> > +	if (level < 1 || level > 7) {
> >  		printk(KERN_ERR "Invalid interrupt level\n");
> >  		return -EINVAL;
> >  	}
> > @@ -1386,7 +1386,7 @@ void vme_irq_free(struct vme_dev *vdev, int level, int statid)
> >  		return;
> >  	}
> >  
> > -	if ((level < 1) || (level > 7)) {
> > +	if (level < 1 || level > 7) {
> >  		printk(KERN_ERR "Invalid interrupt level\n");
> >  		return;
> >  	}
> > @@ -1433,7 +1433,7 @@ int vme_irq_generate(struct vme_dev *vdev, int level, int statid)
> >  		return -EINVAL;
> >  	}
> >  
> > -	if ((level < 1) || (level > 7)) {
> > +	if (level < 1 || level > 7) {
> >  		printk(KERN_WARNING "Invalid interrupt level\n");
> >  		return -EINVAL;
> >  	}
> > -- 
> > 2.41.0
> > 
> > 
> 
> Hi,
> 
> This is the friendly patch-bot of Greg Kroah-Hartman.  You have sent him
> a patch that has triggered this response.  He used to manually respond
> to these common problems, but in order to save his sanity (he kept
> writing the same thing over and over, yet to different people), I was
> created.  Hopefully you will not take offence and will fix the problem
> in your patch and resubmit it so that it can be accepted into the Linux
> kernel tree.
> 
> You are receiving this message because of the following common error(s)
> as indicated below:
> 
> - You sent a patch that has been sent multiple times in the past few
>   days, and is the same type to ones that has been recently rejected.
>   Please always look at the mailing list traffic to determine if you are
>   duplicating other people's work.
> 
> If you wish to discuss this problem further, or you have questions about
> how to resolve this issue, please feel free to respond to this email and
> Greg will reply once he has dug out from the pending patches received
> from other developers.
> 

Hi Greg,

I've read other email threads for other patches where you convey the
idea that this can be a false positive and that you don't see a problem
with using extra parentheses either, and also that this sometimes can
confuse developers.
Did I understand it correctly? If so, should I discard this commit then?

> thanks,
> 
> greg k-h's patch email bot

Thank you.

Alexon Oliveira