Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.35 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.35;
Feedback-ID: ifd194980:Fastmail
References: <20231123144337.13112-1-garyrookard@fastmail.org>
 <20231123144337.13112-3-garyrookard@fastmail.org>
 <5ff4d268-2fcb-4d55-819a-e2650731b91f@gmail.com>
User-agent: mu4e 1.10.6; emacs 29.1
From:   Gary Rookard <garyrookard@fastmail.org>
To:     Philipp Hortmann <philipp.g.hortmann@gmail.com>
Cc:     gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, linux-staging@lists.linux.dev,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/5] staging: rtl8192e: renamed variable
 TXCountToDataRate
Date:   Thu, 23 Nov 2023 18:19:25 -0500
In-reply-to: <5ff4d268-2fcb-4d55-819a-e2650731b91f@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <87v89svybm.fsf@fastmail.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Precedence: bulk


Philipp Hortmann <philipp.g.hortmann@gmail.com> writes:

> On 11/23/23 15:43, Gary Rookard wrote:
>> Renamed from Pascal/CamelCase to Snake case the variable
>> TXCountToDataRate.
>> TXCountToDataRate -> tx_count_to_data_rate
>> Linux kernel coding style (cleanup), checkpatch Avoid CamelCase.
>> Driver/module rtl8192e compiles.
>> Signed-off-by: Gary Rookard <garyrookard@fastmail.org>
>> ---
>> v3: Corrected versioning from v1 -> v3, includes change history.
>> v2: v2 was skipped over..v3 corrects this.
>> v1 Style and compile issues, asked to redo.
>>   drivers/staging/rtl8192e/rtl819x_HTProc.c    | 2 +-
>>   drivers/staging/rtl8192e/rtllib.h            | 2 +-
>>   drivers/staging/rtl8192e/rtllib_softmac_wx.c | 2 +-
>>   3 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>> diff --git a/drivers/staging/rtl8192e/rtl819x_HTProc.c
>> b/drivers/staging/rtl8192e/rtl819x_HTProc.c
>> index 280e335cbb6d..fb8294f31a60 100644
>> --- a/drivers/staging/rtl8192e/rtl819x_HTProc.c
>> +++ b/drivers/staging/rtl8192e/rtl819x_HTProc.c
>> @@ -114,7 +114,7 @@ static u16 ht_mcs_to_data_rate(struct rtllib_device *ieee, u8 nMcsRate)
>>   	return MCS_DATA_RATE[is40MHz][isShortGI][(nMcsRate & 0x7f)];
>>   }
>>   -u16  TxCountToDataRate(struct rtllib_device *ieee, u8 nDataRate)
>> +u16  tx_count_to_data_rate(struct rtllib_device *ieee, u8 nDataRate)
>>   {
>>   	u16	CCKOFDMRate[12] = {0x02, 0x04, 0x0b, 0x16, 0x0c, 0x12, 0x18,
>>   				   0x24, 0x30, 0x48, 0x60, 0x6c};
>> diff --git a/drivers/staging/rtl8192e/rtllib.h b/drivers/staging/rtl8192e/rtllib.h
>> index d2cf3cfaaaba..0226a69f40c3 100644
>> --- a/drivers/staging/rtl8192e/rtllib.h
>> +++ b/drivers/staging/rtl8192e/rtllib.h
>> @@ -1783,7 +1783,7 @@ extern u16 MCS_DATA_RATE[2][2][77];
>>   u8 HTCCheck(struct rtllib_device *ieee, u8 *pFrame);
>>   void HTResetIOTSetting(struct rt_hi_throughput *ht_info);
>>   bool IsHTHalfNmodeAPs(struct rtllib_device *ieee);
>> -u16  TxCountToDataRate(struct rtllib_device *ieee, u8 nDataRate);
>> +u16  tx_count_to_data_rate(struct rtllib_device *ieee, u8 nDataRate);
>>   int rtllib_rx_ADDBAReq(struct rtllib_device *ieee, struct sk_buff *skb);
>>   int rtllib_rx_ADDBARsp(struct rtllib_device *ieee, struct sk_buff *skb);
>>   int rtllib_rx_DELBA(struct rtllib_device *ieee, struct sk_buff *skb);
>> diff --git a/drivers/staging/rtl8192e/rtllib_softmac_wx.c b/drivers/staging/rtl8192e/rtllib_softmac_wx.c
>> index f32584291704..28aba1d610f7 100644
>> --- a/drivers/staging/rtl8192e/rtllib_softmac_wx.c
>> +++ b/drivers/staging/rtl8192e/rtllib_softmac_wx.c
>> @@ -208,7 +208,7 @@ int rtllib_wx_get_rate(struct rtllib_device *ieee,
>>   {
>>   	u32 tmp_rate;
>>   -	tmp_rate = TxCountToDataRate(ieee,
>> +	tmp_rate = tx_count_to_data_rate(ieee,
>>   				     ieee->softmac_stats.CurrentShowTxate);
>>   	wrqu->bitrate.value = tmp_rate * 500000;
>>   
>
> CHECK: Alignment should match open parenthesis
> #61: FILE: drivers/staging/rtl8192e/rtllib_softmac_wx.c:212:
> +	tmp_rate = tx_count_to_data_rate(ieee,
>  				     ieee->softmac_stats.CurrentShowTxate)
Yes, I'm guilty of ignoring the addional CHECKS in my patch
diff. Cleanup only allows one type of correction per patch. They are
going to be included in a follow up patch series that I'm working on.
If this is unacceptable thinking on my part then I will stand corrected.

P.S.
Sorry, but they have been gone over with checkpatch and codespell.

Regards,
Gary