netdev - Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] mwifiex: Add quirk to disable deep sleep with certain hardware revision

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: <YYLO+A2Psg9wloN9@smile.fi.intel.com>
Date:   Wed, 3 Nov 2021 20:03:36 +0200
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@...nel.org>
Cc:     Jonas Dreßler <verdre@...d.nl>,
        Amitkumar Karwar <amitkarwar@...il.com>,
        Ganapathi Bhat <ganapathi017@...il.com>,
        Xinming Hu <huxinming820@...il.com>,
        Kalle Valo <kvalo@...eaurora.org>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Tsuchiya Yuto <kitakar@...il.com>,
        linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Maximilian Luz <luzmaximilian@...il.com>,
        Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
        Pali Rohár <pali@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] mwifiex: Add quirk to disable deep sleep with
 certain hardware revision

On Wed, Nov 03, 2021 at 12:45:27PM -0500, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 03, 2021 at 07:38:35PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 03, 2021 at 06:10:55PM +0100, Jonas Dreßler wrote:
> 
> > > +	if (mwifiex_send_cmd(priv, HostCmd_CMD_VERSION_EXT,
> > > +			     HostCmd_ACT_GEN_GET, 0, &ver_ext, false)) {
> > > +		mwifiex_dbg(priv->adapter, MSG,
> > > +			    "Checking hardware revision failed.\n");
> > > +	}
> > 
> > Checkpatch won't warn you if string literal even > 100. So move it to one line
> > and drop curly braces. Ditto for the case(s) below.
> 
> I don't understand the advantage of making this one line.  I *do*
> understand the advantage of joining a single string so grep can find
> it more easily.  But that does make the code a little bit uglier, and
> in a case like this, you don't get the benefit of better grepping, so
> I don't see the point.

Then disregard my comment. I've no hard feelings about it :-)

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko