linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] staging: rtlwifi: Fix line too long warning

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <1509648700.1011.11.camel@gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 02 Nov 2017 14:51:40 -0400
From:   Kien Ha <kienha9922@...il.com>
To:     Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc:     Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>,
        devel@...verdev.osuosl.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] staging: rtlwifi: Fix line too long warning

On Wed, 2017-11-01 at 17:47 +0100, Greg KH wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 31, 2017 at 12:48:04AM -0400, Kien Ha wrote:
> > > From aa0f4ae8c325545b1fd794d6bbf8c4d2f64e2ec2 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00
> > > 2001
> > 
> > From: Kien Ha <kienha9922@...il.com>
> > Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2017 14:07:55 -0400
> > Subject: [PATCH v2] staging: rtlwifi: Fix line too long warning
> 
> Why is all of this here in the "changelog body" of the patch?
Noted. And thanks!
> 
> > 
> > Made nested if else statement more concise to help conform to
> > coding
> > style.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Kien Ha <kienha9922@...il.com>
> > ---
> > Changes in v2:
> > - Improve block of code to be more concise
> > 
> >  drivers/staging/rtlwifi/base.c | 25 ++++++++-----------------
> >  1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/staging/rtlwifi/base.c
> > b/drivers/staging/rtlwifi/base.c
> > index b88b0e8edd3d..fdd1ab1e38c5 100644
> > --- a/drivers/staging/rtlwifi/base.c
> > +++ b/drivers/staging/rtlwifi/base.c
> > @@ -1273,23 +1273,14 @@ void rtl_get_tcb_desc(struct ieee80211_hw
> > *hw,
> >  			 * and N rate will all be controlled by FW
> >  			 * when tcb_desc->use_driver_rate = false
> >  			 */
> > -			if (sta && sta->vht_cap.vht_supported) {
> > -				tcb_desc->hw_rate =
> > -				_rtl_get_vht_highest_n_rate(hw,
> > sta);
> > -			} else {
> > -				if (sta && (sta-
> > >ht_cap.ht_supported)) {
> > -					tcb_desc->hw_rate =
> > -					    _rtl_get_highest_n_rat
> > e(hw, sta);
> > -				} else {
> > -					if (rtlmac->mode ==
> > WIRELESS_MODE_B) {
> > -						tcb_desc->hw_rate
> > =
> > -						    rtlpriv->cfg-
> > >maps[RTL_RC_CCK_RATE11M];
> > -					} else {
> > -						tcb_desc->hw_rate
> > =
> > -						    rtlpriv->cfg-
> > >maps[RTL_RC_OFDM_RATE54M];
> > -					}
> > -				}
> > -			}
> > +			tcb_desc->hw_rate =
> > +				sta && sta->vht_cap.vht_supported
> > ?
> > +					rtl_get_vht_highest_n_rate
> > (hw, sta) :
> > +				sta && sta->ht_cap.ht_supported ?
> > +					_rtl_get_highest_n_rate(hw
> > , sta) :
> > +				rtlmac->mode == WIRELESS_MODE_B ?
> > +					rtlpriv->cfg-
> > >maps[RTL_RC_CCK_RATE11M] :
> > +					rtlpriv->cfg-
> > >maps[RTL_RC_OFDM_RATE54M];
> 
> That's horrible to read, can you understand it?
> 
> I hate ? : logic, please write code for people to read, not
> compilers.

I agree, I find it difficult to read. I'm wondering, is it
necessary to have these nested if and else statements? Sorry
if it isn't terribly obvious at a glance since I'm writing this
while in class. Maybe something like the code snippet below
would be better.

 			if (sta && sta->vht_cap.vht_supported) {
 				tcb_desc->hw_rate =
-				_rtl_get_vht_highest_n_rate(hw, sta);
+					_rtl_get_vht_highest_n_rate(hw, sta);
+			} else if (sta && sta->ht_cap.ht_supported) {
+				tcb_desc->hw_rate =
+					_rtl_get_highest_n_rate(hw, sta);
+			} else if (rtlmac->mode == WIRELESS_MODE_B) {
+				tcb_desc->hw_rate =
+					rtlpriv->cfg->maps[RTL_RC_CCK_RATE11M];
 			} else {
-				if (sta && (sta->ht_cap.ht_supported)) {
-					tcb_desc->hw_rate =
-					    _rtl_get_highest_n_rate(hw, sta);
-				} else {
-					if (rtlmac->mode == WIRELESS_MODE_B) {
-						tcb_desc->hw_rate =
-						    rtlpriv->cfg->maps[RTL_RC_CCK_RATE11M];
-					} else {
-						tcb_desc->hw_rate =
-						    rtlpriv->cfg->maps[RTL_RC_OFDM_RATE54M];
-					}
-				}
+				tcb_desc_hw_rate =
+					rtlpriv->cfg->maps[RTL_RC_OFDM_RATE54M];
 			}
 		}

Thanks,
Kien Ha