Hi Larry,
I had a question about f0eb856e0b6c: "rtlwifi: rtl8188ee: Add new
driver" from Mar 24, 2013.
drivers/net/wireless/rtlwifi/rtl8188ee/hw.c
1631 for (path = 0; path < MAX_RF_PATH; path++) {
1632 /*2.4G default value*/
1633 for (i = 0; i < MAX_CHNL_GROUP_24G; i++) {
1634 pwr2g->index_cck_base[path][i] = hwinfo[eadr++];
1635 if (pwr2g->index_cck_base[path][i] == 0xFF)
1636 pwr2g->index_cck_base[path][i] = 0x2D;
1637 }
1638 for (i = 0; i < MAX_CHNL_GROUP_24G-1; i++) {
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
We skip the last element of the array. It's declared on the stack in
the caller function so it just has uninitialized stack data. It doesn't
look intentional to me.
1639 pwr2g->index_bw40_base[path][i] = hwinfo[eadr++];
1640 if (pwr2g->index_bw40_base[path][i] == 0xFF)
1641 pwr2g->index_bw40_base[path][i] = 0x2D;
1642 }
regards,
dan carpenter
On 04/07/2013 04:39 AM, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> Hi Larry,
>
> I had a question about f0eb856e0b6c: "rtlwifi: rtl8188ee: Add new
> driver" from Mar 24, 2013.
>
> drivers/net/wireless/rtlwifi/rtl8188ee/hw.c
> 1631 for (path = 0; path < MAX_RF_PATH; path++) {
> 1632 /*2.4G default value*/
> 1633 for (i = 0; i < MAX_CHNL_GROUP_24G; i++) {
> 1634 pwr2g->index_cck_base[path][i] = hwinfo[eadr++];
> 1635 if (pwr2g->index_cck_base[path][i] == 0xFF)
> 1636 pwr2g->index_cck_base[path][i] = 0x2D;
> 1637 }
> 1638 for (i = 0; i < MAX_CHNL_GROUP_24G-1; i++) {
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> We skip the last element of the array. It's declared on the stack in
> the caller function so it just has uninitialized stack data. It doesn't
> look intentional to me.
>
> 1639 pwr2g->index_bw40_base[path][i] = hwinfo[eadr++];
> 1640 if (pwr2g->index_bw40_base[path][i] == 0xFF)
> 1641 pwr2g->index_bw40_base[path][i] = 0x2D;
> 1642 }
>
> regards,
Dan,
Thanks for noticing this difference. I agree that there is no reason for any
difference in the range os the two loops.
I will submit a patch.
Larry