staging: fbtft: remove unnecessary braces in if statements and space before close parenthesis in function call

Adhere to Linux kernel coding style.

Reported by checkpatch:

CHECK: Unnecessary parentheses around 'devcode != 0x0000'
CHECK: Unnecessary parentheses around 'devcode != 0x9320'
CHECK: Unnecessary parentheses around 'par->info->var.xres == 320'
CHECK: Unnecessary parentheses around 'par->info->var.yres == 240'
CHECK: Unnecessary parentheses around 'par->spi->bits_per_word == 8'
CHECK: Unnecessary parentheses around '!txbuflen'
CHECK: Unnecessary parentheses around 'bpp > 8'
ERROR: space prohibited before that close parenthesis ')'

Signed-off-by: Riyan Dhiman <riyandhiman14@gmail.com>
---
 drivers/staging/fbtft/fb_ili9320.c | 2 +-
 drivers/staging/fbtft/fb_ra8875.c  | 2 +-
 drivers/staging/fbtft/fbtft-bus.c  | 6 +++---
 drivers/staging/fbtft/fbtft-core.c | 2 +-
 4 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

On Tue, Jul 23, 2024 at 11:33:11AM +0530, Riyan Dhiman wrote:
> Adhere to Linux kernel coding style.
> 
> Reported by checkpatch:
> 
> CHECK: Unnecessary parentheses around 'devcode != 0x0000'
> CHECK: Unnecessary parentheses around 'devcode != 0x9320'
> CHECK: Unnecessary parentheses around 'par->info->var.xres == 320'
> CHECK: Unnecessary parentheses around 'par->info->var.yres == 240'
> CHECK: Unnecessary parentheses around 'par->spi->bits_per_word == 8'
> CHECK: Unnecessary parentheses around '!txbuflen'
> CHECK: Unnecessary parentheses around 'bpp > 8'
> ERROR: space prohibited before that close parenthesis ')'
> 
> Signed-off-by: Riyan Dhiman <riyandhiman14@gmail.com>
> ---
>  drivers/staging/fbtft/fb_ili9320.c | 2 +-
>  drivers/staging/fbtft/fb_ra8875.c  | 2 +-
>  drivers/staging/fbtft/fbtft-bus.c  | 6 +++---
>  drivers/staging/fbtft/fbtft-core.c | 2 +-
>  4 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/fbtft/fb_ili9320.c b/drivers/staging/fbtft/fb_ili9320.c
> index 0be7c2d51548..409b54cc562e 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/fbtft/fb_ili9320.c
> +++ b/drivers/staging/fbtft/fb_ili9320.c
> @@ -37,7 +37,7 @@ static int init_display(struct fbtft_par *par)
>  	devcode = read_devicecode(par);
>  	fbtft_par_dbg(DEBUG_INIT_DISPLAY, par, "Device code: 0x%04X\n",
>  		      devcode);
> -	if ((devcode != 0x0000) && (devcode != 0x9320))
> +	if (devcode != 0x0000 && devcode != 0x9320)
>  		dev_warn(par->info->device,
>  			 "Unrecognized Device code: 0x%04X (expected 0x9320)\n",
>  			devcode);
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/fbtft/fb_ra8875.c b/drivers/staging/fbtft/fb_ra8875.c
> index 398bdbf53c9a..ce305a0bea48 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/fbtft/fb_ra8875.c
> +++ b/drivers/staging/fbtft/fb_ra8875.c
> @@ -50,7 +50,7 @@ static int init_display(struct fbtft_par *par)
>  
>  	par->fbtftops.reset(par);
>  
> -	if ((par->info->var.xres == 320) && (par->info->var.yres == 240)) {
> +	if (par->info->var.xres == 320 && par->info->var.yres == 240) {
>  		/* PLL clock frequency */
>  		write_reg(par, 0x88, 0x0A);
>  		write_reg(par, 0x89, 0x02);
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/fbtft/fbtft-bus.c b/drivers/staging/fbtft/fbtft-bus.c
> index 3d422bc11641..02d7dbd38678 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/fbtft/fbtft-bus.c
> +++ b/drivers/staging/fbtft/fbtft-bus.c
> @@ -62,9 +62,9 @@ out:									      \
>  }                                                                             \
>  EXPORT_SYMBOL(func);
>  
> -define_fbtft_write_reg(fbtft_write_reg8_bus8, u8, u8, )
> +define_fbtft_write_reg(fbtft_write_reg8_bus8, u8, u8,)
>  define_fbtft_write_reg(fbtft_write_reg16_bus8, __be16, u16, cpu_to_be16)
> -define_fbtft_write_reg(fbtft_write_reg16_bus16, u16, u16, )
> +define_fbtft_write_reg(fbtft_write_reg16_bus16, u16, u16,)
>  
>  void fbtft_write_reg8_bus9(struct fbtft_par *par, int len, ...)
>  {
> @@ -85,7 +85,7 @@ void fbtft_write_reg8_bus9(struct fbtft_par *par, int len, ...)
>  	if (len <= 0)
>  		return;
>  
> -	if (par->spi && (par->spi->bits_per_word == 8)) {
> +	if (par->spi && par->spi->bits_per_word == 8) {
>  		/* we're emulating 9-bit, pad start of buffer with no-ops
>  		 * (assuming here that zero is a no-op)
>  		 */
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/fbtft/fbtft-core.c b/drivers/staging/fbtft/fbtft-core.c
> index 8e2fd0c0fee2..53b104559502 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/fbtft/fbtft-core.c
> +++ b/drivers/staging/fbtft/fbtft-core.c
> @@ -666,7 +666,7 @@ struct fb_info *fbtft_framebuffer_alloc(struct fbtft_display *display,
>  		txbuflen = 0;
>  
>  #ifdef __LITTLE_ENDIAN
> -	if ((!txbuflen) && (bpp > 8))
> +	if (!txbuflen && bpp > 8)
>  		txbuflen = PAGE_SIZE; /* need buffer for byteswapping */
>  #endif
>  
> -- 
> 2.39.2
> 
> 

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, and is
  identical 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

On Tue, Jul 23, 2024 at 06:28:19PM +0530, Riyan Dhiman wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> Thank you for your feedback on my patch submission.
> I have reviewed the mailing list traffic and noted that the last patch
> addressing the same coding style issue was submitted in April. Given this
> timeframe, I believed it was appropriate to submit my patch to contribute
> to the resolution of the ongoing issue.
> As this is my first contribution to the Linux kernel, I want to ensure that
> my submission aligns with the requirements. I would greatly appreciate your
> guidance on how to improve my patch and avoid duplicating previous efforts.

The issue is that the checkpatch warning for too many () characters is
just not right, and shouldn't be applied for staging fixes, sorry.  The
code is fine as-is.

thanks,

greg k-h

On Wed, Jul 24, 2024 at 06:22:55PM +0530, Riyan Dhiman wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> Thank you for your feedback on my patch submission.
> I understand that the fix provided by my patch is not needed. As this is my
> first contribution to the Linux kernel, I am eager to learn and make
> valuable contributions.
> To ensure my future submissions are more aligned with the needs, I would
> like to know if it would be helpful for me to focus on the following types
> of fixes:
> 
>    - CHECK: usleep_range is preferred over udelay; see
>    Documentation/timers/timers-howto.rst

That's very hard to fix without access to the device and the knowledge
of what needs to happen.  See the archives for where people have tried
to do this and the responses they got.

>    - WARNING: Unnecessary ftrace-like logging - prefer using ftrace

That's good to clean up, try that and see!

thanks,
g
reg k-h