linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] staging: rtl8723bs: clean up brace coding style issues

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: <62a06f2c17df6ecac4a64a0c0d3af67fc1f54461.camel@perches.com>
Date:   Thu, 24 Dec 2020 09:15:56 -0800
From:   Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To:     Michael Straube <straube.linux@...il.com>,
        gregkh@...uxfoundation.org
Cc:     hdegoede@...hat.com, Larry.Finger@...inger.net,
        devel@...verdev.osuosl.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] staging: rtl8723bs: clean up brace coding style issues

On Tue, 2020-12-22 at 15:17 +0100, Michael Straube wrote:
> Add missing braces around else arm of if else statement to clear
> style issues reported by checkpatch.
> 
> CHECK: braces {} should be used on all arms of this statement
> CHECK: Unbalanced braces around else statement
[]
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/rtl8723bs/core/rtw_efuse.c b/drivers/staging/rtl8723bs/core/rtw_efuse.c
[]
> @@ -245,8 +245,9 @@ u16 	Address)
>  				break;
>  		}
>  		return rtw_read8(Adapter, EFUSE_CTRL);
> -	} else
> +	} else {
>  		return 0xFF;
> +	}

Instead, when you see a pattern like this it's generally
better to reverse whatever test is above this, return early
and unindent the block above the else.

Here that would be:
---
diff --git a/drivers/staging/rtl8723bs/core/rtw_efuse.c b/drivers/staging/rtl8723bs/core/rtw_efuse.c
index 32ca10f01413..e5c3dba5c8ae 100644
--- a/drivers/staging/rtl8723bs/core/rtw_efuse.c
+++ b/drivers/staging/rtl8723bs/core/rtw_efuse.c
@@ -222,31 +222,31 @@ u16 	Address)
 
 	EFUSE_GetEfuseDefinition(Adapter, EFUSE_WIFI, TYPE_EFUSE_REAL_CONTENT_LEN, (void *)&contentLen, false);
 
-	if (Address < contentLen) {/* E-fuse 512Byte */
-		/* Write E-fuse Register address bit0~7 */
-		temp = Address & 0xFF;
-		rtw_write8(Adapter, EFUSE_CTRL+1, temp);
-		Bytetemp = rtw_read8(Adapter, EFUSE_CTRL+2);
-		/* Write E-fuse Register address bit8~9 */
-		temp = ((Address >> 8) & 0x03) | (Bytetemp & 0xFC);
-		rtw_write8(Adapter, EFUSE_CTRL+2, temp);
-
-		/* Write 0x30[31]= 0 */
-		Bytetemp = rtw_read8(Adapter, EFUSE_CTRL+3);
-		temp = Bytetemp & 0x7F;
-		rtw_write8(Adapter, EFUSE_CTRL+3, temp);
+	if (Address >= contentLen)	/* E-fuse 512Byte */
+		return 0xFF;
 
-		/* Wait Write-ready (0x30[31]= 1) */
+	/* Write E-fuse Register address bit0~7 */
+	temp = Address & 0xFF;
+	rtw_write8(Adapter, EFUSE_CTRL+1, temp);
+	Bytetemp = rtw_read8(Adapter, EFUSE_CTRL+2);
+	/* Write E-fuse Register address bit8~9 */
+	temp = ((Address >> 8) & 0x03) | (Bytetemp & 0xFC);
+	rtw_write8(Adapter, EFUSE_CTRL+2, temp);
+
+	/* Write 0x30[31]= 0 */
+	Bytetemp = rtw_read8(Adapter, EFUSE_CTRL+3);
+	temp = Bytetemp & 0x7F;
+	rtw_write8(Adapter, EFUSE_CTRL+3, temp);
+
+	/* Wait Write-ready (0x30[31]= 1) */
+	Bytetemp = rtw_read8(Adapter, EFUSE_CTRL+3);
+	while (!(Bytetemp & 0x80)) {
 		Bytetemp = rtw_read8(Adapter, EFUSE_CTRL+3);
-		while (!(Bytetemp & 0x80)) {
-			Bytetemp = rtw_read8(Adapter, EFUSE_CTRL+3);
-			k++;
-			if (k == 1000)
-				break;
-		}
-		return rtw_read8(Adapter, EFUSE_CTRL);
-	} else
-		return 0xFF;
+		k++;
+		if (k == 1000)
+			break;
+	}
+	return rtw_read8(Adapter, EFUSE_CTRL);
 
 } /* EFUSE_Read1Byte */