On 30/10/21 2:45 pm, Greg KH wrote: > On Thu, Oct 28, 2021 at 12:04:43AM +0530, Saurav Girepunje wrote: >> Remove the if and else code section for variable pHTInfo->bRegBW40MHz. >> Just before the if condition variable is assign with value 1. >> So if condition check for pHTInfo->bRegBW40MHz is always true. >> >> Similarly for the variable pHTInfo->SelfMimoPs value '3' is assign. >> So if condition check with value '2' will never be true. Remove the >> if condition check for pHTInfo->SelfMimoPs. >> >> Remove the extra blank lines from HTUpdateDefaultSetting function. >> >> Signed-off-by: Saurav Girepunje <saurav.girepunje@xxxxxxxxx> >> --- >> drivers/staging/rtl8192e/rtl819x_HTProc.c | 16 +--------------- >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 15 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/staging/rtl8192e/rtl819x_HTProc.c b/drivers/staging/rtl8192e/rtl819x_HTProc.c >> index 3b8efaf9b88c..6925654dbc03 100644 >> --- a/drivers/staging/rtl8192e/rtl819x_HTProc.c >> +++ b/drivers/staging/rtl8192e/rtl819x_HTProc.c >> @@ -72,34 +72,20 @@ void HTUpdateDefaultSetting(struct rtllib_device *ieee) >> struct rt_hi_throughput *pHTInfo = ieee->pHTInfo; >> >> pHTInfo->bAcceptAddbaReq = 1; >> - >> pHTInfo->bRegShortGI20MHz = 1; >> pHTInfo->bRegShortGI40MHz = 1; >> - >> pHTInfo->bRegBW40MHz = 1; >> - >> - if (pHTInfo->bRegBW40MHz) >> - pHTInfo->bRegSuppCCK = 1; >> - else >> - pHTInfo->bRegSuppCCK = true; >> - >> + pHTInfo->bRegSuppCCK = 1; >> pHTInfo->nAMSDU_MaxSize = 7935UL; >> pHTInfo->bAMSDU_Support = 0; >> - >> pHTInfo->bAMPDUEnable = 1; >> pHTInfo->AMPDU_Factor = 2; >> pHTInfo->MPDU_Density = 0; >> - >> pHTInfo->SelfMimoPs = 3; >> - if (pHTInfo->SelfMimoPs == 2) >> - pHTInfo->SelfMimoPs = 3; >> ieee->bTxDisableRateFallBack = 0; >> ieee->bTxUseDriverAssingedRate = 0; >> - >> ieee->bTxEnableFwCalcDur = 1; >> - >> pHTInfo->bRegRT2RTAggregation = 1; >> - >> pHTInfo->bRegRxReorderEnable = 1; >> pHTInfo->RxReorderWinSize = 64; >> pHTInfo->RxReorderPendingTime = 30; >> -- >> 2.33.0 >> >> > > 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. > 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 > I will break this in multiple patch , One thing at a time. Regards, Saurav
