linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1 3/3] staging: rtl8723bs: remove unused struct debug

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: <aXoMgTvtGkJkcJmo@stanley.mountain>
Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2026 16:17:53 +0300
From: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...aro.org>
To: Ethan Tidmore <ethantidmore06@...il.com>
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	Michael Straube <straube.linux@...il.com>,
	linux-staging@...ts.linux.dev, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 3/3] staging: rtl8723bs: remove unused struct
 debug_priv and all counters

On Tue, Jan 27, 2026 at 04:47:38PM -0600, Ethan Tidmore wrote:
> The struct debug_priv is a collection of diagnostic counters that are
> updated throughout the driver's hot paths (RX/TX, MLME, Power Control,
> and SDIO) but are never read, exposed via debugfs, or used for logic.
> 
> This cleanup removes:
> - The entire struct debug_priv definition and its instance in dvobj_priv.
> - All write-only counter increments across the core, hal, and os_dep.
> - Unused local pointers (psdpriv, pdbgpriv) that were only serving
>   the dead diagnostic logic.
> - Redundant logic blocks that only existed to update these counters.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Ethan Tidmore <ethantidmore06@...il.com>

So in the end we did remove the struct members, but I expected that to
happen in patch 1 and 2, and I spent some time figuring out if there
was a reason we didn't remove the struct members.

It's hard to know how to break up a patch like this.  I guess you
divided it up into patches which deleted whole functions and then
everything else.  Which is fine...  But you need to delete the struct
members as you go along.

regards,
dan carpenter