Hi Dan,
On Wed, Mar 30, 2022 at 09:28:29AM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> I don't really like the focus on commit message minutia... :/
> Basically everyone can understand the commit message. There are one or
> two maintainers who will fly into a rage when they see the word "fix"
> in a commit message but I have a simple solution where I just never
> email them again. My time is too valuable for that nonsense.
>
> We would have applied this patch as is. Or I would normally have
> written it like this:
>
> [PATCH] staging: r8188eu: Delete a stray tab in rtw_survey_cmd_callback()
>
> This code works fine, but the line is indented too far so it's confusing.
> Delete a tab.
>
> Signed-off-by: ...
>
> I had reviewed this patch earlier and almost pointed out that both sides
> of the if statement are the same except for the comment. The "need to
> make timeout handlerOS independent" comment is wrong. I have not looked
> at the details of the other comment.
>
> I did not send my review comments because the patch was fine. But what
> we want is for the code to look more like this.
>
> regards,
> dan carpenter
>
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/r8188eu/core/rtw_cmd.c b/drivers/staging/r8188eu/core/rtw_cmd.c
> index 6eca30124ee8..dcf7b24f95a8 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/r8188eu/core/rtw_cmd.c
> +++ b/drivers/staging/r8188eu/core/rtw_cmd.c
> @@ -1404,11 +1404,8 @@ void rtw_survey_cmd_callback(struct adapter *padapter, struct cmd_obj *pcmd)
> {
> struct mlme_priv *pmlmepriv = &padapter->mlmepriv;
>
> - if (pcmd->res == H2C_DROPPED) {
> + if (pcmd->res != H2C_SUCCESS) {
> /* TODO: cancel timer and do timeout handler directly... */
> - /* need to make timeout handlerOS independent */
> - _set_timer(&pmlmepriv->scan_to_timer, 1);
> - } else if (pcmd->res != H2C_SUCCESS) {
> _set_timer(&pmlmepriv->scan_to_timer, 1);
> }
>
Is it okay if I submit a patch to implement your suggestion? I would
include a "Suggested-by" tag.
Thanks,
Rebecca
