On Wed, 5 Apr 2023, D. Starke wrote:
> From: Daniel Starke <daniel.starke@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> There are multiple places in gsm_control_command and gsm_control_reply that
> derive the specific DLCI handle directly out of the DLCI table in gsm.
>
> Add a local variable which holds this handle and use it instead to improve
> code readability.
>
> Signed-off-by: Daniel Starke <daniel.starke@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/tty/n_gsm.c | 14 ++++++++------
> 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/tty/n_gsm.c b/drivers/tty/n_gsm.c
> index 61f9825fde3c..87720ebc38d7 100644
> --- a/drivers/tty/n_gsm.c
> +++ b/drivers/tty/n_gsm.c
> @@ -1454,16 +1454,17 @@ static int gsm_control_command(struct gsm_mux *gsm, int cmd, const u8 *data,
> int dlen)
> {
> struct gsm_msg *msg;
> + struct gsm_dlci *dlci = gsm->dlci[0];
>
> - msg = gsm_data_alloc(gsm, 0, dlen + 2, gsm->dlci[0]->ftype);
> + msg = gsm_data_alloc(gsm, 0, dlen + 2, dlci->ftype);
> if (msg == NULL)
> return -ENOMEM;
>
> msg->data[0] = (cmd << 1) | CR | EA; /* Set C/R */
> msg->data[1] = (dlen << 1) | EA;
> memcpy(msg->data + 2, data, dlen);
> - gsm_data_queue(gsm->dlci[0], msg);
> - gsm->dlci[0]->tx += dlen;
> + gsm_data_queue(dlci, msg);
> + dlci->tx += dlen;
>
> return 0;
> }
> @@ -1482,15 +1483,16 @@ static void gsm_control_reply(struct gsm_mux *gsm, int cmd, const u8 *data,
> int dlen)
> {
> struct gsm_msg *msg;
> + struct gsm_dlci *dlci = gsm->dlci[0];
>
> - msg = gsm_data_alloc(gsm, 0, dlen + 2, gsm->dlci[0]->ftype);
> + msg = gsm_data_alloc(gsm, 0, dlen + 2, dlci->ftype);
> if (msg == NULL)
> return;
> msg->data[0] = (cmd & 0xFE) << 1 | EA; /* Clear C/R */
> msg->data[1] = (dlen << 1) | EA;
> memcpy(msg->data + 2, data, dlen);
> - gsm_data_queue(gsm->dlci[0], msg);
> - gsm->dlci[0]->tx += dlen;
> + gsm_data_queue(dlci, msg);
> + dlci->tx += dlen;
> }
>
> /**
>
IMO, this patch should be done before patch 8/9.
--
i.
