From: Pavel Skripkin <paskripkin@gmail.com>
To: Zameer Manji <zmanji@gmail.com>
Cc: gregkh@linuxfoundation.org,
Larry Finger <Larry.Finger@lwfinger.net>,
Phillip Potter <phil@philpotter.co.uk>,
Michael Straube <straube.linux@gmail.com>,
"Fabio M. De Francesco" <fmdefrancesco@gmail.com>,
linux-staging@lists.linux.dev, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] staging: r8188eu: remove unused defines in wifi.h
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2021 17:00:41 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <22a48290-814e-bcae-81e5-c23e6310f8f6@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CABtXzjSPNxe-n9QTujMB7=CmhqPFp8V2e86BXmoErWm+6c5coA@mail.gmail.com>
On 11/16/21 16:48, Zameer Manji wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 15, 2021 at 11:56 PM Pavel Skripkin <paskripkin@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> On 11/16/21 04:14, Zameer Manji wrote:
>> > None of these defines in wifi.h are used so they
>> > can be safely removed.
>> >
>> > Signed-off-by: Zameer Manji <zmanji@gmail.com>
>> > ---
>> > drivers/staging/r8188eu/include/wifi.h | 57 --------------------------
>> > 1 file changed, 57 deletions(-)
>> >
>> > diff --git a/drivers/staging/r8188eu/include/wifi.h b/drivers/staging/r8188eu/include/wifi.h
>> > index 193a557f0f47..7cbc7015e90f 100644
>> > --- a/drivers/staging/r8188eu/include/wifi.h
>> > +++ b/drivers/staging/r8188eu/include/wifi.h
>> > @@ -13,32 +13,9 @@
>> > #define BIT(x) (1 << (x))
>>
>> What about BIT() macro? It's already defined in include/vdso/bits.h and
>> can be included via include/bits.h.
>>
>> Most likely linux/ieee80211.h contains bits.h. Haven't checked yet, but
>> anyway redefining kernel macros is not good approach and BIT() can be
>> also removed.
>
> This is a good observation, but the objective of my patch is to remove
> unused defines so it will be easier to do the work that you mention. wifi.h
> and ieee80211.h redefine a few kernel provided values, and I intend to
> follow up by addressing all of them in one go.
>
> Would you be willing to ack this patch as is?
>
I cannot ack, since I am not the maintainer (or even reviewer) of this
driver :) I just saw this BIT() definition and decided to say, that it
can be also removed
Just to be clear: I am not against this patch as is, since _any_ clean
up for this driver is important
Thanks
With regards,
Pavel Skripkin
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-11-16 14:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-11-16 1:14 [PATCH] staging: r8188eu: remove unused defines in wifi.h Zameer Manji
2021-11-16 4:56 ` Pavel Skripkin
2021-11-16 13:48 ` Zameer Manji
2021-11-16 14:00 ` Pavel Skripkin [this message]
2021-11-16 14:18 ` Dan Carpenter
2021-11-16 15:01 ` Pavel Skripkin
2021-11-16 15:11 ` Dan Carpenter
2021-11-16 15:03 ` 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=22a48290-814e-bcae-81e5-c23e6310f8f6@gmail.com \
--to=paskripkin@gmail.com \
--cc=Larry.Finger@lwfinger.net \
--cc=fmdefrancesco@gmail.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-staging@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=phil@philpotter.co.uk \
--cc=straube.linux@gmail.com \
--cc=zmanji@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