From: Peter Wu <peter@lekensteyn.nl>
To: Larry Finger <Larry.Finger@lwfinger.net>
Cc: Rickard Strandqvist <rickard_strandqvist@spectrumdigital.se>,
Chaoming Li <chaoming_li@realsil.com.cn>,
"John W. Linville" <linville@tuxdriver.com>,
linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org,
Network Development <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: wireless: rtlwifi: rtl8192de: hw.c: Cleaning up conjunction always evaluates to false
Date: Sun, 08 Jun 2014 11:26:50 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1436639.AmJiDmeQZF@al> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5393A7D0.2080700@lwfinger.net>
On Saturday 07 June 2014 19:01:20 Larry Finger wrote:
> As you have learned here, automatically making changes suggested by some tool
> may convert a visible bug into one that is invisible, and only found by a
> detailed line-by-line examination of the code, and that is unlikely to happen.
> Please be careful.
>
> From everything I see, the test in all drivers should be
>
> if ((bt_msr & MSR_AP) == MSR_AP)
That only happens to be case because MSR_INFRA | MSR_ADHOC == MSR_AP. This
seems to be the intent:
#define MSR_MASK 0x03
if ((bt_msr & MSR_MASK) == MSR_AP)
In rtl8192se, there are also MSR_LINK_... constants covering MSR_...
and in addition, there is a MSR_LINK_MASK. These macros are quite
redundant though given the other definitions, but the mask is still
nice to have I guess.
Also, personally I would submit just one patch touching all drivers, but
I see that Rickard has submitted a bunch of patches (without cover letter
either, making it more difficult to group them). What would you prefer,
a single patch touching multiple drivers (as the changes are mostly the
same) or split patches?
Kind regards,
Peter
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-06-08 9:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-06-07 14:30 [PATCH] net: wireless: rtlwifi: rtl8192de: hw.c: Cleaning up conjunction always evaluates to false Rickard Strandqvist
2014-06-07 15:02 ` Peter Wu
2014-06-07 15:24 ` Rickard Strandqvist
2014-06-08 0:01 ` Larry Finger
2014-06-08 1:15 ` Rickard Strandqvist
2014-06-08 9:26 ` Peter Wu [this message]
2014-06-08 10:36 ` Rickard Strandqvist
2014-06-08 10:43 ` Peter Wu
2014-06-08 15:45 ` Larry Finger
[not found] ` <CAFo99gZuPV=v1k90iPkAGVFrzVq-z=-h8UgD5a3VCN=wMDNU3w@mail.gmail.com>
[not found] ` <CAFo99gYCYkONL9dZYeHwuJKQTCgFQTmg1aAGZdFAOT=MNARh7Q@mail.gmail.com>
2014-06-10 21:52 ` Peter Wu
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=1436639.AmJiDmeQZF@al \
--to=peter@lekensteyn.nl \
--cc=Larry.Finger@lwfinger.net \
--cc=chaoming_li@realsil.com.cn \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linville@tuxdriver.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rickard_strandqvist@spectrumdigital.se \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).