staging/dgap/dgap.c:981: bad if test ?

2015-01-22 Thread David Binderman
Hello there, [linux-3.19-rc5/drivers/staging/dgap/dgap.c:981]: (warning) Logical disjunction always evaluates to true: conc_type != 65 || conc_type != 66. Source code is     if (conc_type == 0 || conc_type != CX ||     conc_type != EPC) { Suggest code rework. Regards

Re: staging/dgap/dgap.c:981: bad if test ?

2015-01-22 Thread Dan Carpenter
On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 10:05:53AM +, David Binderman wrote: Hello there, [linux-3.19-rc5/drivers/staging/dgap/dgap.c:981]: (warning) Logical disjunction always evaluates to true: conc_type != 65 || conc_type != 66. Source code is     if (conc_type == 0 || conc_type != CX

RE: staging/dgap/dgap.c:981: bad if test ?

2015-01-22 Thread David Binderman
+0300 From: dan.carpen...@oracle.com To: dcb...@hotmail.com; daeseok.y...@gmail.com CC: driverdev-devel@linuxdriverproject.org Subject: Re: staging/dgap/dgap.c:981: bad if test ? On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 10:05:53AM +, David Binderman wrote: Hello there, [linux-3.19-rc5/drivers/staging/dgap

Re: staging/dgap/dgap.c:981: bad if test ?

2015-01-22 Thread Dan Carpenter
On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 10:20:44AM +, David Binderman wrote: I used the static analyser cppcheck to find these two bugs, but you might be able to find similar problems by using gcc compiler flag -Wlogical-op. I turned it on, but GCC 4.7.2 doesn't find anything for me. It complains about:

RE: staging/dgap/dgap.c:981: bad if test ?

2015-01-22 Thread David Binderman
Hello there, On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 10:20:44AM +, David Binderman wrote: I used the static analyser cppcheck to find these two bugs, but you might be able to find similar problems by using gcc compiler flag -Wlogical-op. I turned it on, but GCC

Re: staging/dgap/dgap.c:981: bad if test ?

2015-01-22 Thread DaeSeok Youn
Hi, 2015-01-22 19:14 GMT+09:00 Dan Carpenter dan.carpen...@oracle.com: On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 10:05:53AM +, David Binderman wrote: Hello there, [linux-3.19-rc5/drivers/staging/dgap/dgap.c:981]: (warning) Logical disjunction always evaluates to true: conc_type != 65 || conc_type != 66.