On 06/26/2017 09:41 PM, Souptick Joarder wrote:
Any further comment on this patch ?
On 22-Jun-2017 6:53 PM, "Souptick Joarder" <jrdr.linux@xxxxxxxxx
<mailto:jrdr.linux@xxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
>
> As wmm_enable is initialized to false, hence the else condition never
> execute and boundary is assigned with TX_PAGE_BOUNDARY. So the if-else
> condition can be removed and boundary will be assigned with
> TX_PAGE_BOUNDARY.
>
> Signed-off-by: Souptick Joarder <jrdr.linux@xxxxxxxxx
<mailto:jrdr.linux@xxxxxxxxx>>
> ---
> Changes in v2:
> - Correcting the indent and moving up the change where
> boundary is defined.
>
> drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtlwifi/rtl8192cu/hw.c | 9 +--------
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 8 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtlwifi/rtl8192cu/hw.c
b/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtlwifi/rtl8192cu/hw.c
> index f95a645..107c34e 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtlwifi/rtl8192cu/hw.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtlwifi/rtl8192cu/hw.c
> @@ -835,7 +835,7 @@ static int _rtl92cu_init_mac(struct ieee80211_hw *hw)
> struct rtl_usb_priv *usb_priv = rtl_usbpriv(hw);
> struct rtl_usb *rtlusb = rtl_usbdev(usb_priv);
> int err = 0;
> - u32 boundary = 0;
> + u32 boundary = TX_PAGE_BOUNDARY;
> u8 wmm_enable = false; /* TODO */
> u8 out_ep_nums = rtlusb->out_ep_nums;
> u8 queue_sel = rtlusb->out_queue_sel;
> @@ -845,13 +845,6 @@ static int _rtl92cu_init_mac(struct ieee80211_hw *hw)
> pr_err("Failed to init power on!\n");
> return err;
> }
> - if (!wmm_enable) {
> - boundary = TX_PAGE_BOUNDARY;
> - } else { /* for WMM */
> - boundary = (IS_NORMAL_CHIP(rtlhal->version))
> - ? WMM_CHIP_B_TX_PAGE_BOUNDARY
> - : WMM_CHIP_A_TX_PAGE_BOUNDARY;
> - }
> if (false == rtl92c_init_llt_table(hw, boundary)) {
> pr_err("Failed to init LLT Table!\n");
> return -EINVAL;
This patch troubles me. I have no idea why the original author placed a TODO on
the assignent of wmm_enable. You, however, have left the TODO in place but
removed the actual place where it would make a difference. As a result, it would
become impossible to reconstruct that author's intentions. For that reason
NACK.
Note that these changes make no difference in the object code and the optimizer
will remove that code anyway.
Larry
