On Mon, Aug 16, 2021 at 07:55:03PM +0200, Leon Krieg wrote:
> Sorry to bother you with this low-effort patch but I'd really like to get
> my feet in the water and this whole process is making me nervous. I'd
> really appreciate you taking the time to look over this diff and
> hopefully I did not screw up to badly.
>
> Signed-off-by: Leon Krieg <info@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/staging/ks7010/Kconfig | 7 ++++---
> drivers/staging/ks7010/ks_hostif.c | 2 +-
> drivers/staging/ks7010/ks_wlan_net.c | 20 ++++++++++----------
> 3 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/ks7010/Kconfig b/drivers/staging/ks7010/Kconfig
> index 0987fdc2f70d..4bc17e50ac89 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/ks7010/Kconfig
> +++ b/drivers/staging/ks7010/Kconfig
> @@ -6,6 +6,7 @@ config KS7010
> select WEXT_PRIV
> select FW_LOADER
> help
> - This is a driver for KeyStream KS7010 based SDIO WIFI cards. It is
> - found on at least later Spectec SDW-821 (FCC-ID "S2Y-WLAN-11G-K" only,
> - sadly not FCC-ID "S2Y-WLAN-11B-G") and Spectec SDW-823 microSD cards.
> + Selecting this option enables the driver for KeyStream KS7010 SDIO
> + hardware found in at least Spectec SDW-821 and SDW-823 microSD cards
> + (FCC-ID "S2Y-WLAN-11G-K" but not FCC-ID "S2Y-WLAN-11B-G" and Spectec
> + SDW-823).
>
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/ks7010/ks_hostif.c b/drivers/staging/ks7010/ks_hostif.c
> index eaa70893224a..d2f9d0ed62c1 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/ks7010/ks_hostif.c
> +++ b/drivers/staging/ks7010/ks_hostif.c
> @@ -134,7 +134,7 @@ int get_current_ap(struct ks_wlan_private *priv, struct link_ap_info *ap_info)
> size = (ap_info->rsn.size <= RSN_IE_BODY_MAX) ?
> ap_info->rsn.size : RSN_IE_BODY_MAX;
> if ((ap_info->rsn_mode & RSN_MODE_WPA2) &&
> - (priv->wpa.version == IW_AUTH_WPA_VERSION_WPA2)) {
> + priv->wpa.version == IW_AUTH_WPA_VERSION_WPA2) {
> ap->rsn_ie.id = RSN_INFO_ELEM_ID;
> ap->rsn_ie.size = size;
> memcpy(ap->rsn_ie.body, ap_info->rsn.body, size);
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/ks7010/ks_wlan_net.c b/drivers/staging/ks7010/ks_wlan_net.c
> index 09e7b4cd0138..33abb6a7dbe0 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/ks7010/ks_wlan_net.c
> +++ b/drivers/staging/ks7010/ks_wlan_net.c
> @@ -181,26 +181,26 @@ static int ks_wlan_set_freq(struct net_device *dev,
>
> /* for SLEEP MODE */
> /* If setting by frequency, convert to a channel */
> - if ((fwrq->freq.e == 1) &&
> - (fwrq->freq.m >= 241200000) && (fwrq->freq.m <= 248700000)) {
> + if (fwrq->freq.e == 1 &&
> + fwrq->freq.m >= 241200000 && fwrq->freq.m <= 248700000) {
> int f = fwrq->freq.m / 100000;
> int c = 0;
>
> while ((c < 14) && (f != frequency_list[c]))
> c++;
> - /* Hack to fall through... */
> + fallthrough;
> fwrq->freq.e = 0;
> fwrq->freq.m = c + 1;
> }
> /* Setting by channel number */
> - if ((fwrq->freq.m > 1000) || (fwrq->freq.e > 0))
> + if (fwrq->freq.m > 1000 || fwrq->freq.e > 0)
> return -EOPNOTSUPP;
>
> channel = fwrq->freq.m;
> /* We should do a better check than that,
> * based on the card capability !!!
> */
> - if ((channel < 1) || (channel > 14)) {
> + if (channel < 1 || channel > 14) {
> netdev_dbg(dev, "%s: New channel value of %d is invalid!\n",
> dev->name, fwrq->freq.m);
> return -EINVAL;
> @@ -664,7 +664,7 @@ static int ks_wlan_set_rts(struct net_device *dev, struct iw_request_info *info,
> /* for SLEEP MODE */
> if (vwrq->rts.disabled)
> rthr = 2347;
> - if ((rthr < 0) || (rthr > 2347))
> + if (rthr < 0 || rthr > 2347)
> return -EINVAL;
>
> priv->reg.rts = rthr;
> @@ -702,7 +702,7 @@ static int ks_wlan_set_frag(struct net_device *dev,
> /* for SLEEP MODE */
> if (vwrq->frag.disabled)
> fthr = 2346;
> - if ((fthr < 256) || (fthr > 2346))
> + if (fthr < 256 || fthr > 2346)
> return -EINVAL;
>
> fthr &= ~0x1; /* Get an even value - is it really needed ??? */
> @@ -781,7 +781,7 @@ static int ks_wlan_set_encode(struct net_device *dev,
> return -EINVAL;
>
> /* for SLEEP MODE */
> - if ((index < 0) || (index > 4))
> + if (index < 0 || index > 4)
> return -EINVAL;
>
> index = (index == 0) ? priv->reg.wep_index : (index - 1);
> @@ -882,7 +882,7 @@ static int ks_wlan_get_encode(struct net_device *dev,
> }
>
> /* Which key do we want ? -1 -> tx index */
> - if ((index < 0) || (index >= 4))
> + if (index < 0 || index >= 4)
> index = priv->reg.wep_index;
> if (priv->reg.privacy_invoked) {
> enc->flags &= ~IW_ENCODE_DISABLED;
> @@ -1860,7 +1860,7 @@ static int ks_wlan_set_power_mgmt(struct net_device *dev,
> return -EINVAL;
>
> if ((*uwrq == POWER_MGMT_SAVE1 || *uwrq == POWER_MGMT_SAVE2) &&
> - (priv->reg.operation_mode != MODE_INFRASTRUCTURE))
> + priv->reg.operation_mode != MODE_INFRASTRUCTURE)
> return -EINVAL;
>
> priv->reg.power_mgmt = *uwrq;
> --
> 2.27.0
>
Hi,
This is the friendly patch-bot of Greg Kroah-Hartman. You have sent him
a patch that has triggered this response. He used to manually respond
to these common problems, but in order to save his sanity (he kept
writing the same thing over and over, yet to different people), I was
created. Hopefully you will not take offence and will fix the problem
in your patch and resubmit it so that it can be accepted into the Linux
kernel tree.
You are receiving this message because of the following common error(s)
as indicated below:
- Your patch did many different things all at once, making it difficult
to review. All Linux kernel patches need to only do one thing at a
time. If you need to do multiple things (such as clean up all coding
style issues in a file/driver), do it in a sequence of patches, each
one doing only one thing. This will make it easier to review the
patches to ensure that they are correct, and to help alleviate any
merge issues that larger patches can cause.
- You did not specify a description of why the patch is needed, or
possibly, any description at all, in the email body. Please read the
section entitled "The canonical patch format" in the kernel file,
Documentation/SubmittingPatches for what is needed in order to
properly describe the change.
- You did not write a descriptive Subject: for the patch, allowing Greg,
and everyone else, to know what this patch is all about. Please read
the section entitled "The canonical patch format" in the kernel file,
Documentation/SubmittingPatches for what a proper Subject: line should
look like.
If you wish to discuss this problem further, or you have questions about
how to resolve this issue, please feel free to respond to this email and
Greg will reply once he has dug out from the pending patches received
from other developers.
thanks,
greg k-h's patch email bot
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
