Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Fri, 2 Apr 2021 14:54:49 +0200
From:   Fabio Aiuto <fabioaiuto83@gmail.com>
To:     Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Cc:     dan.carpenter@oracle.com, joe@perches.com,
        linux-staging@lists.linux.dev, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/16] staging: rtl8723bs: remove RT_TRACE logs in
 core/rtw_xmit.c
Message-ID: <20210402125448.GC1420@agape.jhs>
References: <cover.1617356821.git.fabioaiuto83@gmail.com>
 <72ab5222629f912ca2dbe825d194108992d321e7.1617356821.git.fabioaiuto83@gmail.com>
 <20210402115626.GV2088@kadam>
 <20210402124045.GA1420@agape.jhs>
 <YGcSTvoyPtBsXgfp@kroah.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <YGcSTvoyPtBsXgfp@kroah.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Apr 02, 2021 at 02:47:10PM +0200, Greg KH wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 02, 2021 at 02:40:46PM +0200, Fabio Aiuto wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 02, 2021 at 02:56:26PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> > > On Fri, Apr 02, 2021 at 12:01:21PM +0200, Fabio Aiuto wrote:
> > > > @@ -568,20 +561,11 @@ static s32 update_attrib_sec_info(struct adapter *padapter, struct pkt_attrib *p
> > > >  	if (pattrib->encrypt > 0)
> > > >  		memcpy(pattrib->dot118021x_UncstKey.skey, psta->dot118021x_UncstKey.skey, 16);
> > > >  
> > > > -	RT_TRACE(_module_rtl871x_xmit_c_, _drv_info_,
> > > > -		("update_attrib: encrypt =%d  securitypriv.sw_encrypt =%d\n",
> > > > -		pattrib->encrypt, padapter->securitypriv.sw_encrypt));
> > > > -
> > > >  	if (pattrib->encrypt &&
> > > > -		((padapter->securitypriv.sw_encrypt == true) || (psecuritypriv->hw_decrypted == false))) {
> > > > +		((padapter->securitypriv.sw_encrypt) || (!psecuritypriv->hw_decrypted)))
> > > 
> > > You've done too much clean up here.  Just remove the { but leave the
> > > == true/false comparisons.
> > > 
> > > If the patch is only changing five lines or code then fixing checkpatch
> > > warnings on the line of code you are changing is fine, but in this case
> > > you're doing a bunch of changes and these sort of cleanups make it hard
> > > to review.
> > > 
> > > Ease to spot that the curly brace changed:
> > > -		((padapter->securitypriv.sw_encrypt == true) || (psecuritypriv->hw_decrypted == false))) {
> > > +		((padapter->securitypriv.sw_encrypt == true) || (psecuritypriv->hw_decrypted == false)))
> > > 
> > > Hard to spot:
> > > -		((padapter->securitypriv.sw_encrypt == true) || (psecuritypriv->hw_decrypted == false))) {
> > > +		((padapter->securitypriv.sw_encrypt) || (!psecuritypriv->hw_decrypted)))
> > > 
> > > regards,
> > > dan carpenter
> > > 
> > 
> > thank you Dan, it's a good tuning process for me. Shall I resend the
> > whole patchset? Maybe some of them are ok...
> 
> Yes please, you do not want me to pick and choose individual patches out
> of this series.  Our tools grab the whole series at once to apply them.
> 
> thanks,
> 
> greg k-h

ok, got it,

thank you for your patience,:)

fabio