From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To: Yogesh Hegde <yogi.kernel@gmail.com>
Cc: linux-staging@lists.linux.dev, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Philipp Hortmann <philipp.g.hortmann@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] staging: rtl8192e: Fix comparison to NULL of variable rf_set_sens
Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2023 18:00:47 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <2023041537-probing-carpenter-cb71@gregkh> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ZDbvoULAO6wdeso1@Zephyrus-G14>
On Wed, Apr 12, 2023 at 11:21:29PM +0530, Yogesh Hegde wrote:
> Functions _rtl92e_wx_get_sens and _rtl92e_wx_set_sens depend on the
> function rf_set_sens, which is declared but never defined.
> Hence calling this function will cause an oops.
So can an oops happen? I'm confused.
> Because there is no definition of the function priv->rf_set_sens
> will always be NULL.
Ok, but is it used? I'm confused.
>
> As a result _rtl92e_wx_set_sens and _rtl92e_wx_get_sens will always
> return -1.
So it does work? Or it doesn't? What about the oops?
>
> Hence,
> * Removed function definition rf_set_sens
> * Removed usage of variable priv->rf_set_sens
> * Removed functions _rtl92e_wx_get_sens and _rtl92e_wx_set_sens
> * Cleaned up the variables sens and max_sens used in these functions
"Hence" is an odd way to write this.
And when you list things in a changelog, that usually means you want to
have multiple patches, right?
> Suggested-by: Philipp Hortmann <philipp.g.hortmann@gmail.com>
>
> Signed-off-by: Yogesh Hegde <yogi.kernel@gmail.com>
No blank line between these please.
> ---
> Changed in v3:
> - Fixed description to fit within 75 chars
> - Added suggested tags
>
> as Suggested by: Philipp Hortmann <philipp.g.hortmann@gmail.com>
>
> Changed in v2:
> - Removed function definition rf_set_sens
> - Removed usage of variable priv->rf_set_sens
> - Removed functions _rtl92e_wx_get_sens and _rtl92e_wx_set_sens
> - Cleaned up the variables sens and max_sens used in these functions
> ---
> drivers/staging/rtl8192e/rtl8192e/rtl_core.h | 3 --
> drivers/staging/rtl8192e/rtl8192e/rtl_wx.c | 45 --------------------
> 2 files changed, 48 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/rtl8192e/rtl8192e/rtl_core.h b/drivers/staging/rtl8192e/rtl8192e/rtl_core.h
> index 2b2d8af4cf6e..a949a3833cca 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/rtl8192e/rtl8192e/rtl_core.h
> +++ b/drivers/staging/rtl8192e/rtl8192e/rtl_core.h
> @@ -234,7 +234,6 @@ struct r8192_priv {
> struct rt_stats stats;
> struct iw_statistics wstats;
>
> - short (*rf_set_sens)(struct net_device *dev, short sens);
> u8 (*rf_set_chan)(struct net_device *dev, u8 ch);
>
> struct rx_desc *rx_ring[MAX_RX_QUEUE];
> @@ -274,8 +273,6 @@ struct r8192_priv {
> short promisc;
>
> short chan;
> - short sens;
> - short max_sens;
> bool ps_force;
>
> u32 irq_mask[2];
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/rtl8192e/rtl8192e/rtl_wx.c b/drivers/staging/rtl8192e/rtl8192e/rtl_wx.c
> index cb28288a618b..0bb657fda06c 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/rtl8192e/rtl8192e/rtl_wx.c
> +++ b/drivers/staging/rtl8192e/rtl8192e/rtl_wx.c
> @@ -311,10 +311,6 @@ static int _rtl92e_wx_get_range(struct net_device *dev,
> /* ~130 Mb/s real (802.11n) */
> range->throughput = 130 * 1000 * 1000;
>
> - if (priv->rf_set_sens != NULL)
> - /* signal level threshold range */
> - range->sensitivity = priv->max_sens;
> -
> range->max_qual.qual = 100;
> range->max_qual.level = 0;
> range->max_qual.noise = 0;
> @@ -807,45 +803,6 @@ static int _rtl92e_wx_get_retry(struct net_device *dev,
> return 0;
> }
>
> -static int _rtl92e_wx_get_sens(struct net_device *dev,
> - struct iw_request_info *info,
> - union iwreq_data *wrqu, char *extra)
> -{
> - struct r8192_priv *priv = rtllib_priv(dev);
> -
> - if (priv->rf_set_sens == NULL)
> - return -1; /* we have not this support for this radio */
> - wrqu->sens.value = priv->sens;
> - return 0;
> -}
> -
> -static int _rtl92e_wx_set_sens(struct net_device *dev,
> - struct iw_request_info *info,
> - union iwreq_data *wrqu, char *extra)
> -{
> - struct r8192_priv *priv = rtllib_priv(dev);
> -
> - short err = 0;
> -
> - if (priv->hw_radio_off)
> - return 0;
> -
> - mutex_lock(&priv->wx_mutex);
> - if (priv->rf_set_sens == NULL) {
> - err = -1; /* we have not this support for this radio */
> - goto exit;
> - }
> - if (priv->rf_set_sens(dev, wrqu->sens.value) == 0)
> - priv->sens = wrqu->sens.value;
> - else
> - err = -EINVAL;
> -
> -exit:
> - mutex_unlock(&priv->wx_mutex);
> -
> - return err;
> -}
> -
> static int _rtl92e_wx_set_encode_ext(struct net_device *dev,
> struct iw_request_info *info,
> union iwreq_data *wrqu, char *extra)
> @@ -1066,8 +1023,6 @@ static iw_handler r8192_wx_handlers[] = {
> [IW_IOCTL(SIOCGIWFREQ)] = _rtl92e_wx_get_freq,
> [IW_IOCTL(SIOCSIWMODE)] = _rtl92e_wx_set_mode,
> [IW_IOCTL(SIOCGIWMODE)] = _rtl92e_wx_get_mode,
> - [IW_IOCTL(SIOCSIWSENS)] = _rtl92e_wx_set_sens,
> - [IW_IOCTL(SIOCGIWSENS)] = _rtl92e_wx_get_sens,
You are removing 2 ioctls, so at the minimum, this should be 2 different
patches. Please make a patch series here and read up on how to write a
bit better of a changelog text to make it more obvious what is happening
here.
thanks,
greg k-h
prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-04-15 16:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-04-12 17:51 [PATCH v3] staging: rtl8192e: Fix comparison to NULL of variable rf_set_sens Yogesh Hegde
2023-04-15 16:00 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman [this message]
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=2023041537-probing-carpenter-cb71@gregkh \
--to=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-staging@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=philipp.g.hortmann@gmail.com \
--cc=yogi.kernel@gmail.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.