[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150519053914.GP497@windriver.com>
Date: Tue, 19 May 2015 01:39:14 -0400
From: Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@...driver.com>
To: "Dhere, Chaitanya (C.)" <cvijaydh@...teon.com>
CC: "gregkh@...uxfoundation.org" <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
"cristina.opriceana@...il.com" <cristina.opriceana@...il.com>,
"gdonald@...il.com" <gdonald@...il.com>,
"hamohammed.sa@...il.com" <hamohammed.sa@...il.com>,
"mahfouz.saif.elyazal@...il.com" <mahfouz.saif.elyazal@...il.com>,
"benoit.taine@...6.fr" <benoit.taine@...6.fr>,
"devel@...verdev.osuosl.org" <devel@...verdev.osuosl.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] staging: rtl8192u: Modify if, else if conditions to
remove unnecessary equality checks. This change was detected with the help
of coccinelle tool.
[[PATCH] staging: rtl8192u: Modify if, else if conditions to remove unnecessary equality checks. This change was detected with the help of coccinelle tool.] On 18/05/2015 (Mon 16:00) Dhere, Chaitanya (C.) wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Chaitanya Dhere <cvijaydh@...teon.com>
> Reply-To:
>
> ---
> drivers/staging/rtl8192u/ieee80211/ieee80211_softmac.c | 5 ++---
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/rtl8192u/ieee80211/ieee80211_softmac.c b/drivers/staging/rtl8192u/ieee80211/ieee80211_softmac.c
> index d2e8b12..30b0135 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/rtl8192u/ieee80211/ieee80211_softmac.c
> +++ b/drivers/staging/rtl8192u/ieee80211/ieee80211_softmac.c
> @@ -1364,12 +1364,11 @@ static void ieee80211_associate_complete_wq(struct work_struct *work)
> ieee->LinkDetectInfo.NumRecvDataInPeriod= 1;
> }
> ieee->link_change(ieee->dev);
> - if(ieee->is_silent_reset == 0){
> + if (!ieee->is_silent_reset) {
> printk("============>normal associate\n");
> notify_wx_assoc_event(ieee);
> }
In addition to Greg's comments, I'd ask while here, what about the
misleading lack of indent on the notify_wx_assoc_event() call above?
That would concern me more than trivial equality check changes that
gcc will no doubt optimize to the same thing.
> - else if(ieee->is_silent_reset == 1)
> - {
> + else if (ieee->is_silent_reset) {
But why leave the "else if" vs an "else"? You know this:
staging/rtl8192u/ieee80211/ieee80211.h: bool is_silent_reset;
and you've already tested "if (!ieee->is_silent_reset)". By
definition, a bool can have only two values and you've already
tested for one of them, so...
Paul.
--
> printk("==================>silent reset associate\n");
> ieee->is_silent_reset = false;
> }
> --
> 1.9.1
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists