Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 09 May 2017 07:01:58 -0500 | From | "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] net: wireless: ath: ath9k: remove unnecessary code |
| |
Hi Kalle,
Quoting Kalle Valo <kvalo@qca.qualcomm.com>:
> "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <garsilva@embeddedor.com> writes: > >> The name of an array used by itself will always return the array's address. >> So this test will always evaluate as true. >> >> Addresses-Coverity-ID: 1364903 >> Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <garsilva@embeddedor.com> >> --- >> drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/eeprom.c | 2 +- >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/eeprom.c >> b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/eeprom.c >> index fb80ec8..5c3bc28 100644 >> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/eeprom.c >> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/eeprom.c >> @@ -143,7 +143,7 @@ bool ath9k_hw_nvram_read(struct ath_hw *ah, u32 >> off, u16 *data) >> >> if (ah->eeprom_blob) >> ret = ath9k_hw_nvram_read_firmware(ah->eeprom_blob, off, data); >> - else if (pdata && !pdata->use_eeprom && pdata->eeprom_data) >> + else if (pdata && !pdata->use_eeprom) >> ret = ath9k_hw_nvram_read_pdata(pdata, off, data); >> else >> ret = common->bus_ops->eeprom_read(common, off, data); > > The patch may very well be valid (didn't check yet) but the commit log > is gibberish for me. >
Let me correct that and I'll send the patch again.
Thanks! -- Gustavo A. R. Silva
| |