On 22/10/15 20:05, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 06:14:29PM +0100, Luis de Bethencourt wrote:
>> Boolean tests do not need explicit comparison to true or false.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Luis de Bethencourt <luisbg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> diff --git a/drivers/staging/rtl8712/usb_ops_linux.c b/drivers/staging/rtl8712/usb_ops_linux.c
>> index c940722..e33eeed 100644
>> --- a/drivers/staging/rtl8712/usb_ops_linux.c
>> +++ b/drivers/staging/rtl8712/usb_ops_linux.c
>> @@ -266,7 +266,7 @@ u32 r8712_usb_read_port(struct intf_hdl *pintfhdl, u32 addr, u32 cnt, u8 *rmem)
>> if (adapter->bDriverStopped || adapter->bSurpriseRemoved ||
>> adapter->pwrctrlpriv.pnp_bstop_trx)
>> return _FAIL;
>> - if (!precvbuf->reuse == false || !precvbuf->pskb) {
>> + if (precvbuf->reuse || !precvbuf->pskb) {
>> precvbuf->pskb = skb_dequeue(&precvpriv->free_recv_skb_queue);
>> if (precvbuf->pskb != NULL)
>> precvbuf->reuse = true;
>
> You have transformed this faithfully, but my instinct says that the
> original code is wrong. It should be:
>
> if (!precvbuf->reuse || !precvbuf->pskb) {
>
> I checked and usb_read_port() is implemented this way in
> drivers/staging/rtl8188eu/os_dep/usb_ops_linux.c. Again I am going on
> instinct and not a full understanding of the code, but I'm probably
> correct.
>
> Anyway, this is not related to the patch so we should fix it in a later
> patch, but let's not forget.
>
> TODO: rtl8712: fix a reversed condition in r8712_usb_read_port()
>
> regards,
> dan carpenter
>
Hi Dan,
Thank you for the review. I will study the code and make sure that your
intuition is correct, which initially it sounds to be.
Thanks,
Luis
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
