From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.5 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 47A9DC00306 for ; Thu, 5 Sep 2019 14:20:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 53FEF207E0 for ; Thu, 5 Sep 2019 14:20:11 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="key not found in DNS" (0-bit key) header.d=codeaurora.org header.i=@codeaurora.org header.b="fQoZr3Rk"; dkim=fail reason="key not found in DNS" (0-bit key) header.d=codeaurora.org header.i=@codeaurora.org header.b="PEpyC/eg" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2387949AbfIEOUC (ORCPT ); Thu, 5 Sep 2019 10:20:02 -0400 Received: from smtp.codeaurora.org ([198.145.29.96]:51618 "EHLO smtp.codeaurora.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1728666AbfIEOUC (ORCPT ); Thu, 5 Sep 2019 10:20:02 -0400 Received: by smtp.codeaurora.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 2ED086058E; Thu, 5 Sep 2019 14:20:01 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=codeaurora.org; s=default; t=1567693201; bh=CQnx7U4IU5RtD4vXyAeIpL8Vvix5Ftn8Uv26HEnCIsA=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=fQoZr3RkWCfjlw/x4UfChN5WDe2PxJP2QKncrLHKIY6wub1FqPqGF8/R3+QoPPvE3 XmsCi1dgc3vH9aTuo63DciZKL5fb4UglLZs+12gpxqW5fZ5tHEyu+ZZkfy/fILi9Ea +4uJC1M3yYTFqUkwpqWtvgjqBrG9Lqd0iLdM4Tg4= Received: from potku.adurom.net (88-114-240-156.elisa-laajakaista.fi [88.114.240.156]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: kvalo@smtp.codeaurora.org) by smtp.codeaurora.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 35191602DC; Thu, 5 Sep 2019 14:19:58 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=codeaurora.org; s=default; t=1567693200; bh=CQnx7U4IU5RtD4vXyAeIpL8Vvix5Ftn8Uv26HEnCIsA=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=PEpyC/egL0Epv7HLTDxUShyjV/W0Jp/ycJYdiDHqAKXnz/I+2/B9KBnRHfUsGJOB9 IAKjLYDBTaHJV0w8Jczf8mkad3ccggtcjV2OC/8K0acmv86mRVnFr9fE5P3+4KMRo9 REVzXYHJL50gccbjZPYv1X2w2HGSap9ORwYYZL5A= DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 smtp.codeaurora.org 35191602DC Authentication-Results: pdx-caf-mail.web.codeaurora.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=codeaurora.org Authentication-Results: pdx-caf-mail.web.codeaurora.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=kvalo@codeaurora.org From: Kalle Valo To: zhong jiang Cc: , , , Subject: Re: [PATCH] hostap: remove set but not used variable 'copied' in prism2_io_debug_proc_read References: <1567497430-22539-1-git-send-email-zhongjiang@huawei.com> <5D6E1DF2.1000109@huawei.com> <87zhjij1q6.fsf@tynnyri.adurom.net> <5D711760.20903@huawei.com> Date: Thu, 05 Sep 2019 17:19:56 +0300 In-Reply-To: <5D711760.20903@huawei.com> (zhong jiang's message of "Thu, 5 Sep 2019 22:10:40 +0800") Message-ID: <87ftlalt9v.fsf@kamboji.qca.qualcomm.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.5 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org zhong jiang writes: > On 2019/9/5 21:45, Kalle Valo wrote: >> zhong jiang writes: >> >>> Please ignore the patch. Because the hostap_proc.c is marked as 'obsolete'. >> You mean marked in the MAINTAINERS file? I don't see that as a problem, >> I can (and should) still apply any patches submitted to hostap driver. >> > I hit the following issue when checking the patch by checkpatch.pl > > WARNING: drivers/net/wireless/intersil/hostap/hostap_proc.c is marked > as 'obsolete' in the MAINTAINERS hierarchy. > No unnecessary modifications please. > > I certainly hope it can be appiled to upstream if the above check doesn't matter. I have no idea why checkpatch says like that and I'm going to just ignore that warning. As long as the driver is in the tree I think it should be improved. -- https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/developers/documentation/submittingpatches