From: Peter Wu <peter@lekensteyn.nl>
To: Larry Finger <Larry.Finger@lwfinger.net>
Cc: Rickard Strandqvist <rickard_strandqvist@spectrumdigital.se>,
Chaoming Li <chaoming_li@realsil.com.cn>,
"John W. Linville" <linville@tuxdriver.com>,
linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org,
Network Development <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: wireless: rtlwifi: rtl8192de: hw.c: Cleaning up conjunction always evaluates to false
Date: Sun, 08 Jun 2014 11:26:50 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1436639.AmJiDmeQZF@al> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5393A7D0.2080700@lwfinger.net>
On Saturday 07 June 2014 19:01:20 Larry Finger wrote:
> As you have learned here, automatically making changes suggested by some tool
> may convert a visible bug into one that is invisible, and only found by a
> detailed line-by-line examination of the code, and that is unlikely to happen.
> Please be careful.
>
> From everything I see, the test in all drivers should be
>
> if ((bt_msr & MSR_AP) == MSR_AP)
That only happens to be case because MSR_INFRA | MSR_ADHOC == MSR_AP. This
seems to be the intent:
#define MSR_MASK 0x03
if ((bt_msr & MSR_MASK) == MSR_AP)
In rtl8192se, there are also MSR_LINK_... constants covering MSR_...
and in addition, there is a MSR_LINK_MASK. These macros are quite
redundant though given the other definitions, but the mask is still
nice to have I guess.
Also, personally I would submit just one patch touching all drivers, but
I see that Rickard has submitted a bunch of patches (without cover letter
either, making it more difficult to group them). What would you prefer,
a single patch touching multiple drivers (as the changes are mostly the
same) or split patches?
Kind regards,
Peter
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-06-08 9:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-06-07 14:30 [PATCH] net: wireless: rtlwifi: rtl8192de: hw.c: Cleaning up conjunction always evaluates to false Rickard Strandqvist
2014-06-07 15:02 ` Peter Wu
2014-06-07 15:24 ` Rickard Strandqvist
2014-06-08 0:01 ` Larry Finger
2014-06-08 1:15 ` Rickard Strandqvist
2014-06-08 9:26 ` Peter Wu [this message]
2014-06-08 10:36 ` Rickard Strandqvist
2014-06-08 10:36 ` Rickard Strandqvist
2014-06-08 10:43 ` Peter Wu
2014-06-08 15:45 ` Larry Finger
2014-06-08 15:45 ` Larry Finger
[not found] ` <CAFo99gZuPV=v1k90iPkAGVFrzVq-z=-h8UgD5a3VCN=wMDNU3w@mail.gmail.com>
[not found] ` <CAFo99gYCYkONL9dZYeHwuJKQTCgFQTmg1aAGZdFAOT=MNARh7Q@mail.gmail.com>
2014-06-10 21:52 ` Peter Wu
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1436639.AmJiDmeQZF@al \
--to=peter@lekensteyn.nl \
--cc=Larry.Finger@lwfinger.net \
--cc=chaoming_li@realsil.com.cn \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linville@tuxdriver.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rickard_strandqvist@spectrumdigital.se \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.