linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH rtw-next v4] realtek/rtlwifi: remove unused two if blocks and put unicast set inner if and else block

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

Message-ID: <77827732646345698e1bf133bbc87494@realtek.com>
Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2025 08:54:07 +0000
From: Ping-Ke Shih <pkshih@...ltek.com>
To: Les Boys <lesboyspp43@...look.com>
CC: "linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org" <linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH rtw-next v4] realtek/rtlwifi: remove unused two if blocks
 and put unicast set inner if and else block

Les Boys <lesboyspp43@...look.com> wrote:
> Removed unused if blocks and put the unicast set sentence into the
> if/else block.

Commit message is always to explain why we need this patch, but this 
describes what this patch changes.

I think subject and commit message of v1 is more suitable than v4.

More, v5 subject should be "[PATCH rtw-next v5] wifi: rtlwifi: ..."
(please just copy & paste)

Otherwise, patch content is fine to me.

> 
> Signed-off-by: Les Boys <lesboyspp43@...look.com>
> ---
> CHANGE:
> 1. Move change block to correct location;
> 2. Removed initalization of unicast on the begin of function.
> ---
>  drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtlwifi/pci.c | 11 +++++------
>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtlwifi/pci.c b/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtlwifi/pci.c
> index d08046926..eda3b80df 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtlwifi/pci.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtlwifi/pci.c
> @@ -652,7 +652,7 @@ static void _rtl_pci_rx_interrupt(struct ieee80211_hw *hw)
>         unsigned int count = rtlpci->rxringcount;
>         u8 own;
>         u8 tmp_one;
> -       bool unicast = false;
> +       bool unicast;
>         u8 hw_queue = 0;
>         unsigned int rx_remained_cnt = 0;
>         struct rtl_stats stats = {
> @@ -752,14 +752,13 @@ static void _rtl_pci_rx_interrupt(struct ieee80211_hw *hw)
>                         memcpy(IEEE80211_SKB_RXCB(skb), &rx_status,
>                                sizeof(rx_status));
> 
> -                       if (is_broadcast_ether_addr(hdr->addr1)) {
> -                               ;/*TODO*/
> -                       } else if (is_multicast_ether_addr(hdr->addr1)) {
> -                               ;/*TODO*/
> -                       } else {
> +                       if (is_unicast_ether_addr(hdr->addr1)) {
>                                 unicast = true;
>                                 rtlpriv->stats.rxbytesunicast += skb->len;
> +                       } else {
> +                               unicast = false;
>                         }
> +
>                         rtl_is_special_data(hw, skb, false, true);
> 
>                         if (ieee80211_is_data(fc)) {
> --
> 2.44.0