[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <477F20668A386D41ADCC57781B1F70430F534B5541@SC-VEXCH1.marvell.com>
Date: Tue, 7 Jan 2014 18:50:28 -0800
From: Bing Zhao <bzhao@...vell.com>
To: Ding Tianhong <dingtianhong@...wei.com>
CC: "John W. Linville" <linville@...driver.com>,
"linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org" <linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org>,
Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v3.5 17/19] mwifiex: slight optimization of addr compare
Hi Ding,
> Use possibly more efficient ether_addr_equal
> instead of memcmp.
> @@ -782,8 +782,7 @@ static int mwifiex_ret_ibss_coalescing_status(struct mwifiex_private *priv,
> }
>
> /* If BSSID is diff, modify current BSS parameters */
> - if (memcmp(priv->curr_bss_params.bss_descriptor.mac_address,
> - ibss_coal_resp->bssid, ETH_ALEN)) {
> + if (!ether_addr_equal(priv->curr_bss_params.bss_descriptor.mac_address, ibss_coal_resp->bssid))
Could you break the line?
If you run "checkpatch.pl" you will spot this warning.
> if (!IS_11N_ENABLED(priv) ||
> - memcmp(priv->curr_addr, rx_pkt_hdr->eth803_hdr.h_dest, ETH_ALEN)) {
> + !ether_addr_equal_unaligned(priv->curr_addr, rx_pkt_hdr->eth803_hdr.h_dest)) {
Also over 80 characters here.
Thanks,
Bing
Powered by blists - more mailing lists