All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
To: Yan-Hsuan Chuang <yhchuang@realtek.com>,
	Ping-Ke Shih <pkshih@realtek.com>,
	Kalle Valo <kvalo@codeaurora.org>
Cc: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	"Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
Subject: [rtlwifi-btcoex] Suspicious code in halbtc8821a1ant driver
Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2018 20:25:40 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180405012540.GA24241@embeddedor.com> (raw)

Hi all,

While doing some static analysis I came across the following piece of code at drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtlwifi/btcoexist/halbtc8821a1ant.c:1581:

1581 static void btc8821a1ant_act_bt_sco_hid_only_busy(struct btc_coexist *btcoexist,
1582                                                   u8 wifi_status)
1583 {
1584         /* tdma and coex table */
1585         btc8821a1ant_ps_tdma(btcoexist, NORMAL_EXEC, true, 5);
1586 
1587         if (BT_8821A_1ANT_WIFI_STATUS_NON_CONNECTED_ASSO_AUTH_SCAN ==
1588             wifi_status)
1589                 btc8821a1ant_coex_table_with_type(btcoexist, NORMAL_EXEC, 1);
1590         else
1591                 btc8821a1ant_coex_table_with_type(btcoexist, NORMAL_EXEC, 1);
1592 }

The issue here is that the code for both branches of the if-else statement is identical.

The if-else was introduced a year ago in this commit c6821613e653

I wonder if an argument should be changed in any of the calls to btc8821a1ant_coex_table_with_type?

What do you think?

Thanks
--
Gustavo

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavo-L1vi/lXTdts+Va1GwOuvDg@public.gmane.org>
To: Yan-Hsuan Chuang
	<yhchuang-Rasf1IRRPZFBDgjK7y7TUQ@public.gmane.org>,
	Ping-Ke Shih <pkshih-Rasf1IRRPZFBDgjK7y7TUQ@public.gmane.org>,
	Kalle Valo <kvalo-sgV2jX0FEOL9JmXXK+q4OQ@public.gmane.org>
Cc: linux-wireless-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org,
	netdev-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org,
	linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org,
	"Gustavo A. R. Silva"
	<gustavo-L1vi/lXTdts+Va1GwOuvDg@public.gmane.org>
Subject: [rtlwifi-btcoex] Suspicious code in halbtc8821a1ant driver
Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2018 20:25:40 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180405012540.GA24241@embeddedor.com> (raw)

Hi all,

While doing some static analysis I came across the following piece of code at drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtlwifi/btcoexist/halbtc8821a1ant.c:1581:

1581 static void btc8821a1ant_act_bt_sco_hid_only_busy(struct btc_coexist *btcoexist,
1582                                                   u8 wifi_status)
1583 {
1584         /* tdma and coex table */
1585         btc8821a1ant_ps_tdma(btcoexist, NORMAL_EXEC, true, 5);
1586 
1587         if (BT_8821A_1ANT_WIFI_STATUS_NON_CONNECTED_ASSO_AUTH_SCAN ==
1588             wifi_status)
1589                 btc8821a1ant_coex_table_with_type(btcoexist, NORMAL_EXEC, 1);
1590         else
1591                 btc8821a1ant_coex_table_with_type(btcoexist, NORMAL_EXEC, 1);
1592 }

The issue here is that the code for both branches of the if-else statement is identical.

The if-else was introduced a year ago in this commit c6821613e653

I wonder if an argument should be changed in any of the calls to btc8821a1ant_coex_table_with_type?

What do you think?

Thanks
--
Gustavo

             reply	other threads:[~2018-04-05  1:25 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-04-05  1:25 Gustavo A. R. Silva [this message]
2018-04-05  1:25 ` [rtlwifi-btcoex] Suspicious code in halbtc8821a1ant driver Gustavo A. R. Silva
2018-04-05  2:06 ` Pkshih
2018-04-05  2:06   ` Pkshih

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=20180405012540.GA24241@embeddedor.com \
    --to=gustavo@embeddedor.com \
    --cc=kvalo@codeaurora.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=pkshih@realtek.com \
    --cc=yhchuang@realtek.com \
    /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.