<Ajay.Kathat@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> 于2019年7月19日周五 下午7:34写道：
>
> On 7/19/2019 1:40 PM, Chuhong Yuan wrote:
> >
> > Merge the combo use of memcpy and le32_to_cpus.
> > Use get_unaligned_le32 instead.
> > This simplifies the code.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Chuhong Yuan <hslester96@xxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > drivers/staging/wilc1000/wilc_wfi_cfgoperations.c | 3 +--
> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/staging/wilc1000/wilc_wfi_cfgoperations.c b/drivers/staging/wilc1000/wilc_wfi_cfgoperations.c
> > index d72fdd333050..12fb4add05ec 100644
> > --- a/drivers/staging/wilc1000/wilc_wfi_cfgoperations.c
> > +++ b/drivers/staging/wilc1000/wilc_wfi_cfgoperations.c
> > @@ -1038,8 +1038,7 @@ void wilc_wfi_p2p_rx(struct wilc_vif *vif, u8 *buff, u32 size)
> > s32 freq;
> > __le16 fc;
> >
> > - memcpy(&header, (buff - HOST_HDR_OFFSET), HOST_HDR_OFFSET);
> > - le32_to_cpus(&header);
> > + header = get_unaligned_le32(buff - HOST_HDR_OFFSET);
> > pkt_offset = GET_PKT_OFFSET(header);
> >
> > if (pkt_offset & IS_MANAGMEMENT_CALLBACK) {
> >
>
> Thanks for sending the patches.
>
> The code change looks okay to me. Just a minor comment, avoid the use of
> same subject line for different patches.
These two patches are in the same subsystem and solve the same problem.
I splitted them into two patches by mistake since I did not notice the problems
in the second patch when I sent the first one.
Should I merge the two patches and resend?
>
> Regards,
> Ajay
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
