2018-09-29 08:59:24

by Shubham Singh

Subject: [PATCH] Staging: vt6656: baseband.c: fixed unnecessary paranthesis

From: shubhsherl <[email protected]>

Fixed a coding line issue.

Signed-off-by: shubhsherl <[email protected]>
---
drivers/staging/vt6656/baseband.c | 8 ++++----
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/staging/vt6656/baseband.c b/drivers/staging/vt6656/baseband.c
index b29ba237fa29..540cc9eafd07 100644
--- a/drivers/staging/vt6656/baseband.c
+++ b/drivers/staging/vt6656/baseband.c
@@ -382,8 +382,8 @@ int vnt_vt3184_init(struct vnt_private *priv)

dev_dbg(&priv->usb->dev, "RF Type %d\n", priv->rf_type);

- if ((priv->rf_type == RF_AL2230) ||
- (priv->rf_type == RF_AL2230S)) {
+ if (priv->rf_type == RF_AL2230 ||
+ priv->rf_type == RF_AL2230S) {
priv->bb_rx_conf = vnt_vt3184_al2230[10];
length = sizeof(vnt_vt3184_al2230);
addr = vnt_vt3184_al2230;
@@ -454,8 +454,8 @@ int vnt_vt3184_init(struct vnt_private *priv)
vnt_control_out(priv, MESSAGE_TYPE_WRITE, 0,
MESSAGE_REQUEST_BBAGC, length_agc, array);

- if ((priv->rf_type == RF_VT3226) ||
- (priv->rf_type == RF_VT3342A0)) {
+ if (priv->rf_type == RF_VT3226 ||
+ priv->rf_type == RF_VT3342A0) {
vnt_control_out_u8(priv, MESSAGE_REQUEST_MACREG,
MAC_REG_ITRTMSET, 0x23);
vnt_mac_reg_bits_on(priv, MAC_REG_PAPEDELAY, 0x01);
--
2.18.0

2018-09-29 09:35:14

by Greg Kroah-Hartman

Subject: Re: [PATCH] Staging: vt6656: baseband.c: fixed unnecessary paranthesis

On Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 02:28:54PM +0530, Shubham Singh wrote:
> From: shubhsherl <[email protected]>
>
> Fixed a coding line issue.
>
> Signed-off-by: shubhsherl <[email protected]>

We need a real name please.

> ---
> drivers/staging/vt6656/baseband.c | 8 ++++----
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/vt6656/baseband.c b/drivers/staging/vt6656/baseband.c
> index b29ba237fa29..540cc9eafd07 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/vt6656/baseband.c
> +++ b/drivers/staging/vt6656/baseband.c
> @@ -382,8 +382,8 @@ int vnt_vt3184_init(struct vnt_private *priv)
>
> dev_dbg(&priv->usb->dev, "RF Type %d\n", priv->rf_type);
>
> - if ((priv->rf_type == RF_AL2230) ||
> - (priv->rf_type == RF_AL2230S)) {
> + if (priv->rf_type == RF_AL2230 ||
> + priv->rf_type == RF_AL2230S) {

Huh? What coding style issue caused this? The original code is fine,
don't you agree? This type of change just makes it harder to work with
over time (hint, you have to go look up the order of operations all the
time...)

thanks

greg k-h