From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AEA2D3803DE; Thu, 29 Jan 2026 14:14:51 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1769696091; cv=none; b=Z+/QlYKH3C82C/P3KyoAnCYyIPmpKy53ZltjMI1ySJQwFldOO5XUKe0kDUIQcAH/mpSzJESVn0ivOFSL/dkf3hofdMZEWRLP6/LKqTHt0myWoR6ftWBLbYVLEIHiAIJWODDOmGZKnJQ295kKIKN1/Hy5x3ct2uiKWnLGS+PKQ5s= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1769696091; c=relaxed/simple; bh=8K1Bp/HP5tUPjyUPiCToihZmUJx8CTldwV7w6bt3/HM=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=EITjVpWpfRY3rcEBIHgR3/jbBKPsKMz3IlKFVMeVc++H5lpZaaKKqb2hOd1opbUIMBVpsiBqWYNY8RopKT7iE5rPAGZaS661RWXThaACgnydKYt1nCbc9yIieqKwyC6eDeAZkFOPqq0UAlzCmpflUfH2BnHNpiSv48MWTf3t8hQ= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linuxfoundation.org header.i=@linuxfoundation.org header.b=mJXcSIpv; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linuxfoundation.org header.i=@linuxfoundation.org header.b="mJXcSIpv" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 17E82C4CEF7; Thu, 29 Jan 2026 14:14:50 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=linuxfoundation.org; s=korg; t=1769696091; bh=8K1Bp/HP5tUPjyUPiCToihZmUJx8CTldwV7w6bt3/HM=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=mJXcSIpvGPsZAor8wOoT8gD/S5UQeGXy14pObht46CTqxMYsu+1rYWlwaxA/fJoq9 VdKlqbp5uaFQ5fP1zWNBAcIp0m0fTvHdGoYFtbS98917uLga8yFEHrZ5P3ieeGljv3 mUHnPtCy3oHhFbBNoMZAbs2vUrg6s3Fmu6T1cDXw= Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2026 15:14:44 +0100 From: Greg Kroah-Hartman To: Te-Hsiu Huang Cc: Dan Carpenter , Joe Perches , linux-staging@lists.linux.dev, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] staging: rtl8723bs: refactor BSS Coexistence channel report logic Message-ID: <2026012949-scorpion-handgun-433d@gregkh> References: <20260129080110.73884-1-tehsiu.huang@gmail.com> <2026012943-danger-tweed-8f81@gregkh> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-staging@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: On Thu, Jan 29, 2026 at 01:54:37AM -0800, Te-Hsiu Huang wrote: > On Thu, Jan 29, 2026 at 12:54 AM Greg Kroah-Hartman > wrote: > > > That's a lot of different things all in one single patch. SHouldn't > > this be split up into different ones? > I kept these changes in one patch because they all work together to > replace the old ICS logic and remove the magic numbers. Splitting them > might break the build or make the code inconsistent halfway through. > I was suggested renaming and using a bool array structure in the > earlier patch here: > https://lore.kernel.org/all/e87acd109ea5eb4e3f8fc233788cd0dbd128407d.camel@perches.com/ > I kept the 2D structure to maintain parity with the IEEE 802.11 spec > as original implementation. It makes the code semantically correct and > easier to extend for other Operating Classes in the future. > > > And did you use AI to generate this patch? > I used AI tools to polish the language of my commit message and to > perform a parity check, ensuring the refactored boolean logic is > functionally identical to the original code. Then as per our development rules, you must document this properly. Please read and follow them for when you resubmit this. > > > Also, how was this tested? What prompted you to want to make this > > change in the first place? > The patch was tested by: > 1. Cross-compile the module for the rtl8723bs driver (make > M=drivers/staging/rtl8723bs) to ensure no build regressions. > 2. Ran it through scripts/checkpatch.pl to confirm it meets kernel > coding standards. > 3. Since I do not have the physical hardware, I performed a manual > check (by AI verification) to ensure the logic remains identical. AI can not "verify" anything, you must always check that, sorry. greg k-h