[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <480d8984-a5fb-be1b-b553-e01609601059@canonical.com>
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 2020 12:05:17 +0100
From: Colin Ian King <colin.king@...onical.com>
To: Kalle Valo <kvalo@...eaurora.org>,
Carl Huang <cjhuang@...eaurora.org>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, ath11k@...ts.infradead.org,
"linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org" <linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org>,
netdev@...r.kernel.org
Cc: "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: re: ath11k: initialize wmi config based on hw_params
Hi,
static analysis with Coverity has detected a duplicated assignment issue
with the following commit:
commit 2d4bcbed5b7d53e19fc158885e7340b464b64507
Author: Carl Huang <cjhuang@...eaurora.org>
Date: Mon Aug 17 13:31:51 2020 +0300
ath11k: initialize wmi config based on hw_params
The analysis is as follows:
74 config->beacon_tx_offload_max_vdev = 0x2;
75 config->num_multicast_filter_entries = 0x20;
76 config->num_wow_filters = 0x16;
Unused value (UNUSED_VALUE)
assigned_value: Assigning value 1U to config->num_keep_alive_pattern
here, but that stored value is overwritten before it can be used.
77 config->num_keep_alive_pattern = 0x1;
value_overwrite: Overwriting previous write to
config->num_keep_alive_pattern with value 0U.
78 config->num_keep_alive_pattern = 0;
I'm not sure if one of these assignments is redundant, or perhaps one of
the assignments is meant to be setting a different structure element.
Colin
Powered by blists - more mailing lists