On Mon, Jun 03, 2019 at 09:04:57PM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > On Tue, Jun 04, 2019 at 12:24:12AM +0530, Hariprasad Kelam wrote: > > Knowing the fact that operator '|' is faster than '+'. > > Its better we replace + with | in this case. > > > > Issue reported by coccicheck > > drivers/staging/emxx_udc/emxx_udc.h:94:34-35: WARNING: sum of probable > > bitmasks, consider | > > > > Signed-off-by: Hariprasad Kelam <hariprasad.ke...@gmail.com> > > --- > > drivers/staging/emxx_udc/emxx_udc.h | 2 +- > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/staging/emxx_udc/emxx_udc.h > > b/drivers/staging/emxx_udc/emxx_udc.h > > index b8c3dee..88d6bda 100644 > > --- a/drivers/staging/emxx_udc/emxx_udc.h > > +++ b/drivers/staging/emxx_udc/emxx_udc.h > > @@ -91,7 +91,7 @@ int vbus_irq; > > #define BIT30 0x40000000 > > #define BIT31 0x80000000 > > All of those BITXX defines should be removed and the "real" BIT(X) macro > used instead. Yes will send separate patch to address this. > > > -#define TEST_FORCE_ENABLE (BIT18 + BIT16) > > +#define TEST_FORCE_ENABLE (BIT18 | BIT16) > > It really doesn't matter, a good compiler will have already turned this > into a constant value so you really do not know if this is less/faster > code or not, right? > > Did you look at the output to verify this actually changed anything? > > thanks, > > greg k-h
Ok . Treating this as false postive from coccicheck. Thanks, Hariprasad k
