[media-s3c-camif] question about arguments position

From: Gustavo A. R. Silva
Date: Thu May 04 2017 - 15:05:18 EST

Hello everybody,

While looking into Coverity ID 1248800 I ran into the following piece of code at drivers/media/platform/s3c-camif/camif-capture.c:67:

/* Locking: called with camif->slock spinlock held */
static int s3c_camif_hw_init(struct camif_dev *camif, struct camif_vp *vp)
const struct s3c_camif_variant *variant = camif->variant;

if (camif->sensor.sd == NULL || vp->out_fmt == NULL)
return -EINVAL;

if (variant->ip_revision == S3C244X_CAMIF_IP_REV)
camif_hw_set_test_pattern(camif, camif->test_pattern);
if (variant->has_img_effect)
camif_hw_set_effect(camif, camif->colorfx,
camif->colorfx_cb, camif->colorfx_cr);
if (variant->ip_revision == S3C6410_CAMIF_IP_REV)
vp->state &= ~ST_VP_CONFIG;

return 0;

The issue here is that the position of arguments in the call to camif_hw_set_effect() function do not match the order of the parameters:

camif->colorfx_cb is passed to cr
camif->colorfx_cr is passed to cb

This is the function prototype:

void camif_hw_set_effect(struct camif_dev *camif, unsigned int effect,
unsigned int cr, unsigned int cb)

My question here is if this is intentional?

In case it is not, I will send a patch to fix it. But first it would be great to hear any comment about it.

By the way... the same is happening at drivers/media/platform/s3c-camif/camif-capture.c:366

Thank you
Gustavo A. R. Silva