From: Denis Efremov <efremov@xxxxxxxxx> There is no need to check 'priv->bt_ant_couple_ok' twice in rs_bt_update_lq(). The second check is always true. Thus, the expression can be simplified. Signed-off-by: Denis Efremov <efremov@xxxxxxxxx> Signed-off-by: Luca Coelho <luciano.coelho@xxxxxxxxx> --- drivers/net/wireless/intel/iwlwifi/dvm/rs.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/intel/iwlwifi/dvm/rs.c b/drivers/net/wireless/intel/iwlwifi/dvm/rs.c index 74229fcb63a9..226165db7dfd 100644 --- a/drivers/net/wireless/intel/iwlwifi/dvm/rs.c +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/intel/iwlwifi/dvm/rs.c @@ -851,7 +851,7 @@ static void rs_bt_update_lq(struct iwl_priv *priv, struct iwl_rxon_context *ctx, * Is there a need to switch between * full concurrency and 3-wire? */ - if (priv->bt_ci_compliance && priv->bt_ant_couple_ok) + if (priv->bt_ci_compliance) full_concurrent = true; else full_concurrent = false; -- 2.24.0
