RE: [PATCH v4 3/7] wifi: rtw88: Add rtw88xxa.{c,h}

[Ping-Ke Shih <pkshih@realtek.com>]

> > +static void rtw88xxau_init_queue_reserved_page(struct rtw_dev *rtwdev)
> > +{
> > +     const struct rtw_chip_info *chip = rtwdev->chip;
> > +     struct rtw_fifo_conf *fifo = &rtwdev->fifo;
> > +     const struct rtw_page_table *pg_tbl = NULL;
> > +     u16 pubq_num;
> > +     u32 val32;
> > +
> > +     switch (rtw_hci_type(rtwdev)) {
> > +     case RTW_HCI_TYPE_PCIE:
> > +             pg_tbl = &chip->page_table[1];
> > +             break;
> > +     case RTW_HCI_TYPE_USB:
> > +             if (rtwdev->hci.bulkout_num == 2)
> > +                     pg_tbl = &chip->page_table[2];
> > +             else if (rtwdev->hci.bulkout_num == 3)
> > +                     pg_tbl = &chip->page_table[3];
> > +             else if (rtwdev->hci.bulkout_num == 4)
> > +                     pg_tbl = &chip->page_table[4];
> > +             break;
> > +     case RTW_HCI_TYPE_SDIO:
> > +             pg_tbl = &chip->page_table[0];
> > +             break;
> > +     default:
> All other switch (rtw_hci_type(rtwdev)) in this module handle
> the default with an error. Shouldn't you be doing that here too?
> In the default case the code continues with pg_tbl == NULL
> and thus it will crash.

Actually three supported HCI types are listed, so it will never fall into
the default case, which I think this is just to avoid static checkers complain. 
However, 'return' would be more suitable than 'break' for default case. 

> +             break;
> +     }