Kai-Heng Feng [mailto:kai.heng.feng@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] > Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2019 7:18 PM [...] > >> } else { > >> - /* test for RTL8153-BND and RTL8153-BD */ > >> - ocp_data = ocp_read_byte(tp, MCU_TYPE_USB, USB_MISC_1); > >> - if ((ocp_data & BND_MASK) == 0 && (ocp_data & BD_MASK) == 0) { > >> - netif_dbg(tp, probe, tp->netdev, > >> - "Invalid variant for MAC pass through\n"); > >> - return -ENODEV; > >> + bypass_test = false; > >> + mac_obj_name = "\\_SB.AMAC"; > >> + mac_obj_type = ACPI_TYPE_BUFFER; > >> + mac_strlen = 0x17; > >> + } > >> + > >> + if (!bypass_test) { > > > > Maybe you could combine this with the "else" above. > > Then, the variable "bypass_test" could be removed. > > Ok, will do in V3. > > > And the declaration of "ocp_data" could be moved after the "else". > > Isn't putting declarations at the top of the function the preferred way? I mean the ocp_data wouldn't be used out of the else, so you could move the declaration to the inside of the else. However, I don't think you have to send another patch for this. Thanks. Best Regards, Hayes
