On Wed, Jul 10, 2024 at 11:36:16AM +0100, André Draszik wrote:
> There is no need for using the ternary if/else here, simply mask
> TCPC_ALERT_RX_BUF_OVF as necessary, which arguably makes the code
> easier to read.
>
> Signed-off-by: André Draszik <andre.draszik@linaro.org>
Reviewed-by: Heikki Krogerus <heikki.krogerus@linux.intel.com>
> ---
> drivers/usb/typec/tcpm/tcpci_maxim_core.c | 10 ++++------
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/usb/typec/tcpm/tcpci_maxim_core.c b/drivers/usb/typec/tcpm/tcpci_maxim_core.c
> index ad9bb61fd9e0..5b5441db7047 100644
> --- a/drivers/usb/typec/tcpm/tcpci_maxim_core.c
> +++ b/drivers/usb/typec/tcpm/tcpci_maxim_core.c
> @@ -193,9 +193,8 @@ static void process_rx(struct max_tcpci_chip *chip, u16 status)
> * Read complete, clear RX status alert bit.
> * Clear overflow as well if set.
> */
> - ret = max_tcpci_write16(chip, TCPC_ALERT, status & TCPC_ALERT_RX_BUF_OVF ?
> - TCPC_ALERT_RX_STATUS | TCPC_ALERT_RX_BUF_OVF :
> - TCPC_ALERT_RX_STATUS);
> + ret = max_tcpci_write16(chip, TCPC_ALERT,
> + TCPC_ALERT_RX_STATUS | (status & TCPC_ALERT_RX_BUF_OVF));
> if (ret < 0)
> return;
>
> @@ -297,9 +296,8 @@ static irqreturn_t _max_tcpci_irq(struct max_tcpci_chip *chip, u16 status)
> * be cleared until we have successfully retrieved message.
> */
> if (status & ~TCPC_ALERT_RX_STATUS) {
> - mask = status & TCPC_ALERT_RX_BUF_OVF ?
> - status & ~(TCPC_ALERT_RX_STATUS | TCPC_ALERT_RX_BUF_OVF) :
> - status & ~TCPC_ALERT_RX_STATUS;
> + mask = status & ~(TCPC_ALERT_RX_STATUS
> + | (status & TCPC_ALERT_RX_BUF_OVF));
> ret = max_tcpci_write16(chip, TCPC_ALERT, mask);
> if (ret < 0) {
> dev_err(chip->dev, "ALERT clear failed\n");
>
> --
> 2.45.2.803.g4e1b14247a-goog
--
heikki