Merge the combo use of memcpy and le32_to_cpus.
Use get_unaligned_le32 instead.
This simplifies the code.
Signed-off-by: Chuhong Yuan <[email protected]>
---
drivers/staging/wilc1000/wilc_mon.c | 3 +--
drivers/staging/wilc1000/wilc_wlan.c | 9 +++------
2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/staging/wilc1000/wilc_mon.c b/drivers/staging/wilc1000/wilc_mon.c
index 7d7933d40924..d6f14f69ad64 100644
--- a/drivers/staging/wilc1000/wilc_mon.c
+++ b/drivers/staging/wilc1000/wilc_mon.c
@@ -35,8 +35,7 @@ void wilc_wfi_monitor_rx(struct net_device *mon_dev, u8 *buff, u32 size)
return;
/* Get WILC header */
- memcpy(&header, (buff - HOST_HDR_OFFSET), HOST_HDR_OFFSET);
- le32_to_cpus(&header);
+ header = get_unaligned_le32(buff - HOST_HDR_OFFSET);
/*
* The packet offset field contain info about what type of management
* the frame we are dealing with and ack status
diff --git a/drivers/staging/wilc1000/wilc_wlan.c b/drivers/staging/wilc1000/wilc_wlan.c
index d46876edcfeb..7d438ae90c3e 100644
--- a/drivers/staging/wilc1000/wilc_wlan.c
+++ b/drivers/staging/wilc1000/wilc_wlan.c
@@ -703,8 +703,7 @@ static void wilc_wlan_handle_rx_buff(struct wilc *wilc, u8 *buffer, int size)
do {
buff_ptr = buffer + offset;
- memcpy(&header, buff_ptr, 4);
- le32_to_cpus(&header);
+ header = get_unaligned_le32(buff_ptr);
is_cfg_packet = (header >> 31) & 0x1;
pkt_offset = (header >> 22) & 0x1ff;
@@ -874,10 +873,8 @@ int wilc_wlan_firmware_download(struct wilc *wilc, const u8 *buffer,
offset = 0;
do {
- memcpy(&addr, &buffer[offset], 4);
- memcpy(&size, &buffer[offset + 4], 4);
- le32_to_cpus(&addr);
- le32_to_cpus(&size);
+ addr = get_unaligned_le32(&buffer[offset]);
+ size = get_unaligned_le32(&buffer[offset + 4]);
acquire_bus(wilc, WILC_BUS_ACQUIRE_ONLY);
offset += 8;
while (((int)size) && (offset < buffer_size)) {
--
2.20.1
On Fri, Jul 19, 2019 at 12:05:07PM +0000, [email protected] wrote:
>
> On 7/19/2019 5:16 PM, Chuhong Yuan wrote:
> >
> > <[email protected]> 于2019年7月19日周五 下午7:34写道：
> >>
> >> On 7/19/2019 1:40 PM, Chuhong Yuan wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Merge the combo use of memcpy and le32_to_cpus.
> >>> Use get_unaligned_le32 instead.
> >>> This simplifies the code.
> >>>
> >>> Signed-off-by: Chuhong Yuan <[email protected]>
> >>> ---
> >>> drivers/staging/wilc1000/wilc_wfi_cfgoperations.c | 3 +--
> >>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >>>
> >>> diff --git a/drivers/staging/wilc1000/wilc_wfi_cfgoperations.c b/drivers/staging/wilc1000/wilc_wfi_cfgoperations.c
> >>> index d72fdd333050..12fb4add05ec 100644
> >>> --- a/drivers/staging/wilc1000/wilc_wfi_cfgoperations.c
> >>> +++ b/drivers/staging/wilc1000/wilc_wfi_cfgoperations.c
> >>> @@ -1038,8 +1038,7 @@ void wilc_wfi_p2p_rx(struct wilc_vif *vif, u8 *buff, u32 size)
> >>> s32 freq;
> >>> __le16 fc;
> >>>
> >>> - memcpy(&header, (buff - HOST_HDR_OFFSET), HOST_HDR_OFFSET);
> >>> - le32_to_cpus(&header);
> >>> + header = get_unaligned_le32(buff - HOST_HDR_OFFSET);
> >>> pkt_offset = GET_PKT_OFFSET(header);
> >>>
> >>> if (pkt_offset & IS_MANAGMEMENT_CALLBACK) {
> >>>
> >>
> >> Thanks for sending the patches.
> >>
> >> The code change looks okay to me. Just a minor comment, avoid the use of
> >> same subject line for different patches.
> >
> > These two patches are in the same subsystem and solve the same problem.
> > I splitted them into two patches by mistake since I did not notice the problems
> > in the second patch when I sent the first one.
> > Should I merge the two patches and resend?
> >
>
> Yes, please go ahead, merge the patches and send the updated version.
>
This is wrong advice. Don't merge the patches because they are for
different drivers. The original subjects are fine because the
subsystems are different so that's okay.
regards,
dan carpenter