On Sat, Feb 08, 2025 at 12:15:54AM -0800, Ian To wrote:
> Some comments were not formatted correctly. Reported by checkpatch.
>
> Signed-off-by: Ian To <onlyian4981@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/staging/rtl8723bs/core/rtw_security.c | 102 +++++++++---------
> 1 file changed, 51 insertions(+), 51 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/rtl8723bs/core/rtw_security.c b/drivers/staging/rtl8723bs/core/rtw_security.c
> index 1e9eff01b1aa..3281751436fd 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/rtl8723bs/core/rtw_security.c
> +++ b/drivers/staging/rtl8723bs/core/rtw_security.c
> @@ -30,10 +30,10 @@ const char *security_type_str(u8 value)
> /* WEP related ===== */
>
> /*
> - Need to consider the fragment situation
> -*/
> + * Need to consider the fragment situation
> + */
> void rtw_wep_encrypt(struct adapter *padapter, u8 *pxmitframe)
> -{ /* exclude ICV */
> +{ /* exclude ICV */
What does this comment even mean?
> @@ -374,39 +374,38 @@ static void phase1(u16 *p1k, const u8 *tk, const u8 *ta, u32 iv32)
> /* size on the 80-bit block P1K[], using the 128-bit key TK[] */
> for (i = 0; i < PHASE1_LOOP_CNT; i++) {
> /* Each add operation here is mod 2**16 */
> - p1k[0] += _S_(p1k[4] ^ TK16((i&1)+0));
> - p1k[1] += _S_(p1k[0] ^ TK16((i&1)+2));
> - p1k[2] += _S_(p1k[1] ^ TK16((i&1)+4));
> - p1k[3] += _S_(p1k[2] ^ TK16((i&1)+6));
> - p1k[4] += _S_(p1k[3] ^ TK16((i&1)+0));
> + p1k[0] += _S_(p1k[4] ^ TK16((i & 1) + 0));
> + p1k[1] += _S_(p1k[0] ^ TK16((i & 1) + 2));
> + p1k[2] += _S_(p1k[1] ^ TK16((i & 1) + 4));
> + p1k[3] += _S_(p1k[2] ^ TK16((i & 1) + 6));
> + p1k[4] += _S_(p1k[3] ^ TK16((i & 1) + 0));
These aren't comments.
regards,
dan carpenter
