lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2017]   [Sep]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] staging: rtl8192u: fix incorrect mask when calculating TxPowerLevelCCK


Am 05.09.2017 18:32, schrieb Colin King:
> From: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com>
>
> The mask of 0xff and right shift of 8 bits on ret always results in
> a value of 0 for TxPowerLevelCCK. I believe this should be a mask of
> 0xff00, however I do not have the hardware at hand to test this out,
> so there is a distinct possibility I may be wrong on this.
>
> Detected by CoverityScan CID#1357110 ("Operands don't affect result")
>
> Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com>
> ---
> drivers/staging/rtl8192u/r8192U_core.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/rtl8192u/r8192U_core.c b/drivers/staging/rtl8192u/r8192U_core.c
> index 46b3f19e0878..ecc887636173 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/rtl8192u/r8192U_core.c
> +++ b/drivers/staging/rtl8192u/r8192U_core.c
> @@ -2510,7 +2510,7 @@ static int rtl8192_read_eeprom_info(struct net_device *dev)
> ret = eprom_read(dev, (EEPROM_TxPwIndex_CCK >> 1));
> if (ret < 0)
> return ret;
> - priv->EEPROMTxPowerLevelCCK = ((u16)ret & 0xff) >> 8;
> + priv->EEPROMTxPowerLevelCCK = ((u16)ret & 0xff00) >> 8;

Is there any need for the mask ?
(u16) will already reduce ret to 16 bit, the >>8 will shift the lower bits into nirwana

re,
wh

> } else
> priv->EEPROMTxPowerLevelCCK = 0x10;
> RT_TRACE(COMP_EPROM, "CCK Tx Power Levl: 0x%02x\n", priv->EEPROMTxPowerLevelCCK);

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2017-09-05 19:01    [W:0.034 / U:0.752 seconds]
©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site