[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200414132551.GJ1163@kadam>
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 2020 16:25:51 +0300
From: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>
To: Ivan Safonov <insafonov@...il.com>
Cc: devel@...verdev.osuosl.org,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Nishka Dasgupta <nishkadg.linux@...il.com>,
Larry Finger <Larry.Finger@...inger.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/8] staging: rtl8188eu: Remove function rtw_modular64()
On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 03:22:59PM +0300, Ivan Safonov wrote:
> On 4/14/20 2:56 PM, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> > On Sun, Apr 12, 2020 at 04:34:08PM +0300, Ivan Safonov wrote:
> > > > Remove function rtw_modular64 as all it does is call do_div.
> > >
> > > This is wrong. Macro do_div(x, y) change first argument x, but
> > > rtw_modular64(x, y) preserve it.
> > >
> > > > + tsf = pmlmeext->TSFValue - do_div(pmlmeext->TSFValue, (pmlmeinfo->bcn_interval*1024)) - 1024; /* us */
> > >
> > > rounddown(pmlmeext->TSFValue, pmlmeinfo->bcn_interval * 1024) - 1024
> > > is a better replacement for
> >
> > You're absolutely correct that the patch is buggy, but I'm not sure that
> > rounddown() is what we want.
> >
> > rtw_modular64() took the MOD of x. So it should be something like:
> >
> > tsf = pmlmeext->TSFValue - (pmlmeext->TSFValue % (pmlmeinfo->bcn_interval * 1024)) - 1024; /* us */
> >
> > But what the heck is that even??? If pmlmeinfo->bcn_interval is zero
> > or one then the subtraction ends up giving us a negative.
> >
> > regards,
> > dan carpenter
> >
>
> 1. pmlmeext->TSFValue can not be negative, because it is uint64_t;
> 2. pmlmeext->TSFValue is cyclic value:
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timing_synchronization_function ;
> 3. (rounddown(a, b)) is equal to (a - a % b) by definition.
Yeah. You're right. I got mixed up and I misread what you were
suggesting.
tsf = rounddown(pmlmeext->TSFValue, pmlmeinfo->bcn_interval * 1024) - 1024;
regards,
dan carpenter
Powered by blists - more mailing lists