lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2021]   [Apr]   [29]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: [Outreachy kernel] [PATCH 1/2] staging: rtl8723bs: hal: Remove set but unused variables
Date
On Thursday, April 29, 2021 9:26:20 AM CEST Fabio Aiuto wrote:
> Hi Fabio,
>
> On Wed, Apr 28, 2021 at 01:33:45PM +0200, Fabio M. De Francesco wrote:
> > Removed four set but unused variables. Issue detected by gcc.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Fabio M. De Francesco <fmdefrancesco@gmail.com>
> > ---
> >
> > drivers/staging/rtl8723bs/hal/rtl8723b_hal_init.c | 5 -----
> > 1 file changed, 5 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/staging/rtl8723bs/hal/rtl8723b_hal_init.c
> > b/drivers/staging/rtl8723bs/hal/rtl8723b_hal_init.c index
082448557b53..96cb4426a0f4
> > 100644
> > --- a/drivers/staging/rtl8723bs/hal/rtl8723b_hal_init.c
> > +++ b/drivers/staging/rtl8723bs/hal/rtl8723b_hal_init.c
> > @@ -3900,14 +3900,11 @@ u8 GetHalDefVar8723B(struct adapter *padapter,
enum
> > hal_def_variable variable, v>
> > u32 cmd;
> > u32 ra_info1, ra_info2;
> > u32 rate_mask1, rate_mask2;
> >
> > - u8 curr_tx_rate, curr_tx_sgi, hight_rate,
lowest_rate;
> >
> > cmd = 0x40000100 | mac_id;
> > rtw_write32(padapter,
REG_HMEBOX_DBG_2_8723B, cmd);
> > msleep(10);
> > ra_info1 = rtw_read32(padapter, 0x2F0);
> >
> > - curr_tx_rate = ra_info1&0x7F;
> > - curr_tx_sgi = (ra_info1>>7)&0x01;
> >
> > cmd = 0x40000400 | mac_id;
> > rtw_write32(padapter,
REG_HMEBOX_DBG_2_8723B, cmd);
> >
> > @@ -3916,8 +3913,6 @@ u8 GetHalDefVar8723B(struct adapter *padapter, enum
> > hal_def_variable variable, v>
> > ra_info2 = rtw_read32(padapter, 0x2F4);
> > rate_mask1 = rtw_read32(padapter, 0x2F8);
> > rate_mask2 = rtw_read32(padapter, 0x2FC);
> >
> > - hight_rate = ra_info2&0xFF;
> > - lowest_rate = (ra_info2>>8) & 0xFF;
> >
> > }
> > break;
>
> rate_mask{1,2} and ra_info{1,2} seems to be unused as well.
>
> thank you,
>
> fabio
>
Hello Fabio,

I'm not sure about it: rtw_read32 calls a pointer to a function. I'm don't
know drivers programming, however that function looks like an implementation
of a read() system call. So I wouldn't be so sure to remove those calls.

Could calling a (*read) method have side effects on subsequent read()? I mean:
could it update some internal data structure? If not I can remove the
variables you mentioned above and the calls to read32.

I'm looking forward to read your reply.

Thanks,

Fabio



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2021-04-29 09:45    [W:0.080 / U:2.004 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site