Make these statements a little simpler.
Signed-off-by: Joe Perches <[email protected]>
---
drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtlwifi/base.c | 14 +++++------
.../rtlwifi/btcoexist/halbtc8192e2ant.c | 23 ++++++++++---------
.../rtlwifi/btcoexist/halbtc8821a2ant.c | 12 +++++-----
.../realtek/rtlwifi/btcoexist/halbtcoutsrc.c | 9 ++++----
drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtlwifi/pci.c | 2 +-
5 files changed, 30 insertions(+), 30 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtlwifi/base.c b/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtlwifi/base.c
index 270aea0f841b..b8d184950dac 100644
--- a/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtlwifi/base.c
+++ b/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtlwifi/base.c
@@ -1385,7 +1385,7 @@ bool rtl_action_proc(struct ieee80211_hw *hw, struct sk_buff *skb, u8 is_tx)
if (mac->act_scanning)
return false;
- rtl_dbg(rtlpriv, (COMP_SEND | COMP_RECV), DBG_DMESG,
+ rtl_dbg(rtlpriv, COMP_SEND | COMP_RECV, DBG_DMESG,
"%s ACT_ADDBAREQ From :%pM\n",
is_tx ? "Tx" : "Rx", hdr->addr2);
RT_PRINT_DATA(rtlpriv, COMP_INIT, DBG_DMESG, "req\n",
@@ -1428,12 +1428,12 @@ bool rtl_action_proc(struct ieee80211_hw *hw, struct sk_buff *skb, u8 is_tx)
}
break;
case ACT_ADDBARSP:
- rtl_dbg(rtlpriv, (COMP_SEND | COMP_RECV), DBG_DMESG,
+ rtl_dbg(rtlpriv, COMP_SEND | COMP_RECV, DBG_DMESG,
"%s ACT_ADDBARSP From :%pM\n",
is_tx ? "Tx" : "Rx", hdr->addr2);
break;
case ACT_DELBA:
- rtl_dbg(rtlpriv, (COMP_SEND | COMP_RECV), DBG_DMESG,
+ rtl_dbg(rtlpriv, COMP_SEND | COMP_RECV, DBG_DMESG,
"ACT_ADDBADEL From :%pM\n", hdr->addr2);
break;
}
@@ -1519,9 +1519,9 @@ u8 rtl_is_special_data(struct ieee80211_hw *hw, struct sk_buff *skb, u8 is_tx,
/* 68 : UDP BOOTP client
* 67 : UDP BOOTP server
*/
- rtl_dbg(rtlpriv, (COMP_SEND | COMP_RECV),
+ rtl_dbg(rtlpriv, COMP_SEND | COMP_RECV,
DBG_DMESG, "dhcp %s !!\n",
- (is_tx) ? "Tx" : "Rx");
+ is_tx ? "Tx" : "Rx");
if (is_tx)
setup_special_tx(rtlpriv, ppsc,
@@ -1540,8 +1540,8 @@ u8 rtl_is_special_data(struct ieee80211_hw *hw, struct sk_buff *skb, u8 is_tx,
rtlpriv->btcoexist.btc_info.in_4way = true;
rtlpriv->btcoexist.btc_info.in_4way_ts = jiffies;
- rtl_dbg(rtlpriv, (COMP_SEND | COMP_RECV), DBG_DMESG,
- "802.1X %s EAPOL pkt!!\n", (is_tx) ? "Tx" : "Rx");
+ rtl_dbg(rtlpriv, COMP_SEND | COMP_RECV, DBG_DMESG,
+ "802.1X %s EAPOL pkt!!\n", is_tx ? "Tx" : "Rx");
if (is_tx) {
rtlpriv->ra.is_special_data = true;
diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtlwifi/btcoexist/halbtc8192e2ant.c b/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtlwifi/btcoexist/halbtc8192e2ant.c
index 4989fd3bae15..30c782d61d70 100644
--- a/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtlwifi/btcoexist/halbtc8192e2ant.c
+++ b/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtlwifi/btcoexist/halbtc8192e2ant.c
@@ -801,8 +801,8 @@ static void btc8192e2ant_bt_auto_report(struct btc_coexist *btcoexist,
rtl_dbg(rtlpriv, COMP_BT_COEXIST, DBG_LOUD,
"[BTCoex], %s BT Auto report = %s\n",
- (force_exec ? "force to" : ""),
- ((enable_auto_report) ? "Enabled" : "Disabled"));
+ force_exec ? "force to" : "",
+ enable_auto_report ? "Enabled" : "Disabled");
coex_dm->cur_bt_auto_report = enable_auto_report;
if (!force_exec) {
@@ -878,9 +878,9 @@ static void btc8192e2ant_rf_shrink(struct btc_coexist *btcoexist,
struct rtl_priv *rtlpriv = btcoexist->adapter;
rtl_dbg(rtlpriv, COMP_BT_COEXIST, DBG_LOUD,
- "[BTCoex], %s turn Rx RF Shrink = %s\n",
- (force_exec ? "force to" : ""),
- ((rx_rf_shrink_on) ? "ON" : "OFF"));
+ "[BTCoex], %sturn Rx RF Shrink = %s\n",
+ force_exec ? "force to " : "",
+ rx_rf_shrink_on ? "ON" : "OFF");
coex_dm->cur_rf_rx_lpf_shrink = rx_rf_shrink_on;
if (!force_exec) {
@@ -927,9 +927,10 @@ static void btc8192e2ant_dac_swing(struct btc_coexist *btcoexist,
struct rtl_priv *rtlpriv = btcoexist->adapter;
rtl_dbg(rtlpriv, COMP_BT_COEXIST, DBG_LOUD,
- "[BTCoex], %s turn DacSwing=%s, dac_swing_lvl = 0x%x\n",
- (force_exec ? "force to" : ""),
- ((dac_swing_on) ? "ON" : "OFF"), dac_swing_lvl);
+ "[BTCoex], %sturn DacSwing=%s, dac_swing_lvl = 0x%x\n",
+ force_exec ? "force to " : "",
+ dac_swing_on ? "ON" : "OFF",
+ dac_swing_lvl);
coex_dm->cur_dac_swing_on = dac_swing_on;
coex_dm->cur_dac_swing_lvl = dac_swing_lvl;
@@ -987,9 +988,9 @@ static void btc8192e2ant_agc_table(struct btc_coexist *btcoexist,
struct rtl_priv *rtlpriv = btcoexist->adapter;
rtl_dbg(rtlpriv, COMP_BT_COEXIST, DBG_LOUD,
- "[BTCoex], %s %s Agc Table\n",
- (force_exec ? "force to" : ""),
- ((agc_table_en) ? "Enable" : "Disable"));
+ "[BTCoex], %s%s Agc Table\n",
+ force_exec ? "force to " : "",
+ agc_table_en ? "Enable" : "Disable");
coex_dm->cur_agc_table_en = agc_table_en;
if (!force_exec) {
diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtlwifi/btcoexist/halbtc8821a2ant.c b/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtlwifi/btcoexist/halbtc8821a2ant.c
index d2f4287da9a5..43bd52a62c4f 100644
--- a/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtlwifi/btcoexist/halbtc8821a2ant.c
+++ b/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtlwifi/btcoexist/halbtc8821a2ant.c
@@ -732,9 +732,9 @@ static void btc8821a2ant_low_penalty_ra(struct btc_coexist *btcoexist,
struct rtl_priv *rtlpriv = btcoexist->adapter;
rtl_dbg(rtlpriv, COMP_BT_COEXIST, DBG_LOUD,
- "[BTCoex], %s turn LowPenaltyRA = %s\n",
- (force_exec ? "force to" : ""),
- ((low_penalty_ra) ? "ON" : "OFF"));
+ "[BTCoex], %sturn LowPenaltyRA = %s\n",
+ force_exec ? "force to " : "",
+ low_penalty_ra ? "ON" : "OFF");
coex_dm->cur_low_penalty_ra = low_penalty_ra;
if (!force_exec) {
@@ -780,9 +780,9 @@ static void btc8821a2ant_dac_swing(struct btc_coexist *btcoexist,
struct rtl_priv *rtlpriv = btcoexist->adapter;
rtl_dbg(rtlpriv, COMP_BT_COEXIST, DBG_LOUD,
- "[BTCoex], %s turn DacSwing = %s, dac_swing_lvl = 0x%x\n",
- (force_exec ? "force to" : ""),
- ((dac_swing_on) ? "ON" : "OFF"),
+ "[BTCoex], %sturn DacSwing = %s, dac_swing_lvl = 0x%x\n",
+ force_exec ? "force to " : "",
+ dac_swing_on ? "ON" : "OFF",
dac_swing_lvl);
coex_dm->cur_dac_swing_on = dac_swing_on;
coex_dm->cur_dac_swing_lvl = dac_swing_lvl;
diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtlwifi/btcoexist/halbtcoutsrc.c b/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtlwifi/btcoexist/halbtcoutsrc.c
index 8d28c68f083e..f9a2d8a6730c 100644
--- a/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtlwifi/btcoexist/halbtcoutsrc.c
+++ b/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtlwifi/btcoexist/halbtcoutsrc.c
@@ -874,11 +874,10 @@ static void halbtc_display_wifi_status(struct btc_coexist *btcoexist,
seq_printf(m, "\n %-35s = %s / %s/ %s/ AP=%d ",
"Wifi freq/ bw/ traffic",
gl_btc_wifi_freq_string[wifi_freq],
- ((wifi_under_b_mode) ? "11b" :
- gl_btc_wifi_bw_string[wifi_bw]),
- ((!wifi_busy) ? "idle" : ((BTC_WIFI_TRAFFIC_TX ==
- wifi_traffic_dir) ? "uplink" :
- "downlink")),
+ wifi_under_b_mode ? "11b" : gl_btc_wifi_bw_string[wifi_bw],
+ (!wifi_busy ? "idle" :
+ wifi_traffic_dir == BTC_WIFI_TRAFFIC_TX ? "uplink" :
+ "downlink"),
ap_num);
/* power status */
diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtlwifi/pci.c b/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtlwifi/pci.c
index 1d0af72ee780..3189d1c50d52 100644
--- a/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtlwifi/pci.c
+++ b/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtlwifi/pci.c
@@ -557,7 +557,7 @@ static void _rtl_pci_tx_isr(struct ieee80211_hw *hw, int prio)
if (rtlpriv->rtlhal.earlymode_enable)
skb_pull(skb, EM_HDR_LEN);
- rtl_dbg(rtlpriv, (COMP_INTR | COMP_SEND), DBG_TRACE,
+ rtl_dbg(rtlpriv, COMP_INTR | COMP_SEND, DBG_TRACE,
"new ring->idx:%d, free: skb_queue_len:%d, free: seq:%x\n",
ring->idx,
skb_queue_len(&ring->queue),
--
2.26.0
On Sat, 2020-07-25 at 12:55 -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> Make these statements a little simpler.
>
> Signed-off-by: Joe Perches <[email protected]>
> ---
> drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtlwifi/base.c | 14 +++++------
> .../rtlwifi/btcoexist/halbtc8192e2ant.c | 23 ++++++++++---------
> .../rtlwifi/btcoexist/halbtc8821a2ant.c | 12 +++++-----
> .../realtek/rtlwifi/btcoexist/halbtcoutsrc.c | 9 ++++----
> drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtlwifi/pci.c | 2 +-
> 5 files changed, 30 insertions(+), 30 deletions(-)
>
>
[...]
> diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtlwifi/btcoexist/halbtcoutsrc.c
> b/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtlwifi/btcoexist/halbtcoutsrc.c
> index 8d28c68f083e..f9a2d8a6730c 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtlwifi/btcoexist/halbtcoutsrc.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtlwifi/btcoexist/halbtcoutsrc.c
> @@ -874,11 +874,10 @@ static void halbtc_display_wifi_status(struct
> btc_coexist *btcoexist,
> seq_printf(m, "\n %-35s = %s / %s/ %s/ AP=%d ",
> "Wifi freq/ bw/ traffic",
> gl_btc_wifi_freq_string[wifi_freq],
> - ((wifi_under_b_mode) ? "11b" :
> - gl_btc_wifi_bw_string[wifi_bw]),
> - ((!wifi_busy) ? "idle" : ((BTC_WIFI_TRAFFIC_TX ==
> - wifi_traffic_dir) ? "uplink" :
> - "downlink")),
> + wifi_under_b_mode ? "11b" : gl_btc_wifi_bw_string[wifi_bw],
> + (!wifi_busy ? "idle" :
> + wifi_traffic_dir == BTC_WIFI_TRAFFIC_TX ? "uplink" :
> + "downlink"),
I think this would be better
+ !wifi_busy ? "idle" :
+ (wifi_traffic_dir == BTC_WIFI_TRAFFIC_TX ? "uplink" :
+ "downlink"),
> ap_num);
>
> /* power status */
> diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtlwifi/pci.c
> b/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtlwifi/pci.c
> index 1d0af72ee780..3189d1c50d52 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtlwifi/pci.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtlwifi/pci.c
> @@ -557,7 +557,7 @@ static void _rtl_pci_tx_isr(struct ieee80211_hw *hw, int
> prio)
> if (rtlpriv->rtlhal.earlymode_enable)
> skb_pull(skb, EM_HDR_LEN);
>
> - rtl_dbg(rtlpriv, (COMP_INTR | COMP_SEND), DBG_TRACE,
> + rtl_dbg(rtlpriv, COMP_INTR | COMP_SEND, DBG_TRACE,
> "new ring->idx:%d, free: skb_queue_len:%d, free:
> seq:%x\n",
> ring->idx,
> skb_queue_len(&ring->queue),
On Mon, 2020-07-27 at 06:07 +0000, Pkshih wrote:
> On Sat, 2020-07-25 at 12:55 -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> > Make these statements a little simpler.
[]
> > diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtlwifi/btcoexist/halbtcoutsrc.c
[]
> > @@ -874,11 +874,10 @@ static void halbtc_display_wifi_status(struct
> > btc_coexist *btcoexist,
> > seq_printf(m, "\n %-35s = %s / %s/ %s/ AP=%d ",
> > "Wifi freq/ bw/ traffic",
> > gl_btc_wifi_freq_string[wifi_freq],
> > - ((wifi_under_b_mode) ? "11b" :
> > - gl_btc_wifi_bw_string[wifi_bw]),
> > - ((!wifi_busy) ? "idle" : ((BTC_WIFI_TRAFFIC_TX ==
> > - wifi_traffic_dir) ? "uplink" :
> > - "downlink")),
> > + wifi_under_b_mode ? "11b" : gl_btc_wifi_bw_string[wifi_bw],
> > + (!wifi_busy ? "idle" :
> > + wifi_traffic_dir == BTC_WIFI_TRAFFIC_TX ? "uplink" :
> > + "downlink"),
>
> I think this would be better
>
> + !wifi_busy ? "idle" :
> + (wifi_traffic_dir == BTC_WIFI_TRAFFIC_TX ? "uplink" :
> + "downlink"),
It seems most repeated test1 ? : test2 ? : test3 ?:
uses do not have the style you suggest in the kernel.
On Mon, 2020-07-27 at 01:27 -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Mon, 2020-07-27 at 06:07 +0000, Pkshih wrote:
> > On Sat, 2020-07-25 at 12:55 -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> > > Make these statements a little simpler.
> []
> > > diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtlwifi/btcoexist/halbtcoutsrc.c
> []
> > > @@ -874,11 +874,10 @@ static void halbtc_display_wifi_status(struct
> > > btc_coexist *btcoexist,
> > > seq_printf(m, "\n %-35s = %s / %s/ %s/ AP=%d ",
> > > "Wifi freq/ bw/ traffic",
> > > gl_btc_wifi_freq_string[wifi_freq],
> > > - ((wifi_under_b_mode) ? "11b" :
> > > - gl_btc_wifi_bw_string[wifi_bw]),
> > > - ((!wifi_busy) ? "idle" : ((BTC_WIFI_TRAFFIC_TX ==
> > > - wifi_traffic_dir) ?
> "uplink" :
> > > - "downlink")),
> > > + wifi_under_b_mode ? "11b" :
> gl_btc_wifi_bw_string[wifi_bw],
> > > + (!wifi_busy ? "idle" :
> > > + wifi_traffic_dir == BTC_WIFI_TRAFFIC_TX ? "uplink" :
> > > + "downlink"),
> >
> > I think this would be better
> >
> > + !wifi_busy ? "idle" :
> > + (wifi_traffic_dir == BTC_WIFI_TRAFFIC_TX ? "uplink" :
> > + "downlink"),
>
> It seems most repeated test1 ? : test2 ? : test3 ?:
> uses do not have the style you suggest in the kernel.
>
Your change is
(test1 ? : test2 ? :)
So, I think you would like to have parenthesis intentionally.
If so,
test1 ? : (test2 ? :)
would be better.
If not,
test1 ? : test2 ? :
may be what you want (without any parenthesis).
On Mon, 2020-07-27 at 09:04 +0000, Pkshih wrote:
> So, I think you would like to have parenthesis intentionally.
> If so,
> test1 ? : (test2 ? :)
> would be better.
>
>
> If not,
> test1 ? : test2 ? :
> may be what you want (without any parenthesis).
Use whatever style you like, it's unimportant to me
and it's not worth spending any real time on it.
On 7/27/20 9:52 AM, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Mon, 2020-07-27 at 09:04 +0000, Pkshih wrote:
>> So, I think you would like to have parenthesis intentionally.
>> If so,
>> test1 ? : (test2 ? :)
>> would be better.
>>
>>
>> If not,
>> test1 ? : test2 ? :
>> may be what you want (without any parenthesis).
>
> Use whatever style you like, it's unimportant to me
> and it's not worth spending any real time on it.
If you are so busy, why did you jump in with patches that you knew I was already
working on? You knew because you critiqued my first submission.
@Kalle: Please drop my contributions in the sequence "PATCH v2 00/15] rtlwifi:
Change RT_TRACE into rtl_dbg for all drivers".
Larry
Larry Finger <[email protected]> writes:
> On 7/27/20 9:52 AM, Joe Perches wrote:
>> On Mon, 2020-07-27 at 09:04 +0000, Pkshih wrote:
>>> So, I think you would like to have parenthesis intentionally.
>>> If so,
>>> test1 ? : (test2 ? :)
>>> would be better.
>>>
>>>
>>> If not,
>>> test1 ? : test2 ? :
>>> may be what you want (without any parenthesis).
>>
>> Use whatever style you like, it's unimportant to me
>> and it's not worth spending any real time on it.
>
> If you are so busy, why did you jump in with patches that you knew I
> was already working on? You knew because you critiqued my first
> submission.
Yeah, I don't understand this either. First stepping on Larry's work and
when after getting review comments claiming being busy and not caring is
contradicting.
> @Kalle: Please drop my contributions in the sequence "PATCH v2 00/15]
> rtlwifi: Change RT_TRACE into rtl_dbg for all drivers".
Is there a technical reason for that? I prefer that patchset more,
nicely split in smaller patches and it's fully available from patchwork.
Patch 15 had a build problem but I can drop that for now, it can be
resent separately:
https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11681621/
--
https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/developers/documentation/submittingpatches
On Thu, 2020-08-27 at 12:27 +0300, Kalle Valo wrote:
> Larry Finger <[email protected]> writes:
> > On 7/27/20 9:52 AM, Joe Perches wrote:
> > > On Mon, 2020-07-27 at 09:04 +0000, Pkshih wrote:
> > > > So, I think you would like to have parenthesis intentionally.
> > > > If so,
> > > > test1 ? : (test2 ? :)
> > > > would be better.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > If not,
> > > > test1 ? : test2 ? :
> > > > may be what you want (without any parenthesis).
> > >
> > > Use whatever style you like, it's unimportant to me
> > > and it's not worth spending any real time on it.
> >
> > If you are so busy, why did you jump in with patches that you knew I
> > was already working on? You knew because you critiqued my first
> > submission.
>
> Yeah, I don't understand this either. First stepping on Larry's work and
> when after getting review comments claiming being busy and not caring is
> contradicting.
I didn't say I was busy, I said I didn't care.
And it's not stepping on anyone's work, it's
a trivial contribution. Take it or not.
It's been months btw, the pace of the work isn't
particularly fast here.