From: Phillip Potter <phil@philpotter.co.uk>
To: Pavel Skripkin <paskripkin@gmail.com>
Cc: Larry.Finger@lwfinger.net, straube.linux@gmail.com,
martin@kaiser.cx, linux-staging@lists.linux.dev,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 7/7] staging: r8188eu: convert DBG_88E calls in core/rtw_sta_mgt.c
Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2022 00:32:48 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YeDEsOz8GkNPJYJQ@equinox> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <32d83cb4-ceff-a5c5-be62-a8fe99aac3de@gmail.com>
On Tue, Jan 11, 2022 at 12:05:09AM +0300, Pavel Skripkin wrote:
> Hi Phillip,
>
> On 1/10/22 12:00, Phillip Potter wrote:
> > Convert the DBG_88E macro calls in core/rtw_sta_mgt.c to use pr_debug,
> > as their information may be useful to observers, and this gets the
> > driver closer to the point of being able to remove DBG_88E itself.
> >
> > These calls are at points in the call chain where use of dev_dbg or
> > netdev_dbg isn't possible due to lack of device pointer, so plain
> > pr_debug is appropriate here.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Phillip Potter <phil@philpotter.co.uk>
> > ---
> > drivers/staging/r8188eu/core/rtw_sta_mgt.c | 4 ++--
> > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/staging/r8188eu/core/rtw_sta_mgt.c b/drivers/staging/r8188eu/core/rtw_sta_mgt.c
> > index 54561ff239a0..de5406a5870c 100644
> > --- a/drivers/staging/r8188eu/core/rtw_sta_mgt.c
> > +++ b/drivers/staging/r8188eu/core/rtw_sta_mgt.c
> > @@ -104,7 +104,7 @@ inline int rtw_stainfo_offset(struct sta_priv *stapriv, struct sta_info *sta)
> > int offset = (((u8 *)sta) - stapriv->pstainfo_buf) / sizeof(struct sta_info);
> > if (!stainfo_offset_valid(offset))
> > - DBG_88E("%s invalid offset(%d), out of range!!!", __func__, offset);
> > + pr_debug("invalid offset(%d), out of range!!!", offset);
> > return offset;
> > }
>
> There is only one caller of this function and it also checks if offset is
> valid. I think, this check with debug message can be removed from this
> function.
>
Dear Pavel,
Thank you for your feedback, much appreciated. Good call on this one, I
can take it out in a subsequent v3 series.
> > @@ -112,7 +112,7 @@ inline int rtw_stainfo_offset(struct sta_priv *stapriv, struct sta_info *sta)
> > inline struct sta_info *rtw_get_stainfo_by_offset(struct sta_priv *stapriv, int offset)
> > {
> > if (!stainfo_offset_valid(offset))
> > - DBG_88E("%s invalid offset(%d), out of range!!!", __func__, offset);
> > + pr_debug("invalid offset(%d), out of range!!!", offset);
> > return (struct sta_info *)(stapriv->pstainfo_buf + offset * sizeof(struct sta_info));
> > }
>
> Is it safe to proceed with invalid offset? Debug message says it's out of
> range, so might be we should just return with an error?
>
>
>
>
> With regards,
> Pavel Skripkin
I would need to check the code, but good observation. I wanted to limit
the scope of this series explicitly to DBG_88E calls, but might be worth
changing this at the same time.
Regards,
Phil
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-01-14 0:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-01-10 9:00 [PATCH v2 0/7] staging: r8188eu: further per-file DBG_88E cleanups Phillip Potter
2022-01-10 9:00 ` [PATCH v2 1/7] staging: r8188eu: convert DBG_88E calls in core/rtw_ieee80211.c Phillip Potter
2022-01-10 9:00 ` [PATCH v2 2/7] staging: r8188eu: convert DBG_88E calls in core/rtw_xmit.c Phillip Potter
2022-01-10 9:00 ` [PATCH v2 3/7] staging: r8188eu: convert DBG_88E calls in core/rtw_iol.c Phillip Potter
2022-01-10 9:00 ` [PATCH v2 4/7] staging: r8188eu: convert DBG_88E calls in core/rtw_mlme.c Phillip Potter
2022-01-10 9:00 ` [PATCH v2 5/7] staging: r8188eu: convert DBG_88E calls in core/rtw_ioctl_set.c Phillip Potter
2022-01-10 9:00 ` [PATCH v2 6/7] staging: r8188eu: convert DBG_88E calls in core/rtw_mlme_ext.c Phillip Potter
2022-01-10 9:00 ` [PATCH v2 7/7] staging: r8188eu: convert DBG_88E calls in core/rtw_sta_mgt.c Phillip Potter
2022-01-10 21:05 ` Pavel Skripkin
2022-01-14 0:32 ` Phillip Potter [this message]
2022-01-14 20:15 ` Pavel Skripkin
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=YeDEsOz8GkNPJYJQ@equinox \
--to=phil@philpotter.co.uk \
--cc=Larry.Finger@lwfinger.net \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-staging@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=martin@kaiser.cx \
--cc=paskripkin@gmail.com \
--cc=straube.linux@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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox