Re: [PATCH] staging: rtl8723bs: core: simplify the if condition

[Saurav Girepunje]

On 09/10/21 10:21 pm, Hans de Goede wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 10/9/21 8:00 AM, Saurav Girepunje wrote:
> > if psta is NULL, function is returning with fail. On next if condition
> > again checking if psta is not a NULL. Remove multiple if condition check.
> >
> > Function is already using goto exit statement to exit.Replace multiple
> > return with goto exit statement.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Saurav Girepunje <saurav.girepunje@xxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> >   drivers/staging/rtl8723bs/core/rtw_xmit.c | 61 ++++++++++-------------
> >   1 file changed, 26 insertions(+), 35 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/staging/rtl8723bs/core/rtw_xmit.c b/drivers/staging/rtl8723bs/core/rtw_xmit.c
> > index 34505b35a7f3..4e4a1bed882b 100644
> > --- a/drivers/staging/rtl8723bs/core/rtw_xmit.c
> > +++ b/drivers/staging/rtl8723bs/core/rtw_xmit.c
> > @@ -932,49 +932,40 @@ s32 rtw_make_wlanhdr(struct adapter *padapter, u8 *hdr, struct pkt_attrib *pattr
> >   		/* TODO: fill HT Control Field */
> >
> >   		/* Update Seq Num will be handled by f/w */
> > -		{
> > -			struct sta_info *psta;
> > -
> > -			psta = rtw_get_stainfo(&padapter->stapriv, pattrib->ra);
> > -			if (pattrib->psta != psta)
> > -				return _FAIL;
> > -
> > -			if (!psta)
> > -				return _FAIL;
> > +		struct sta_info *psta;
>
> You are now declaring a variable after some statements, this will
> cause a compiler warning in some cases. Please move this variable
> declaration up, grouping it together with the other variable
> declarations.
Yes, I will move variable declaration to up.
> > -			if (!(psta->state & _FW_LINKED))
> > -				return _FAIL;
> > +		psta = rtw_get_stainfo(&padapter->stapriv, pattrib->ra);
> > +		if (!psta || pattrib->psta != psta || !(psta->state & _FW_LINKED))
> > +			res = _FAIL;
> > +			goto exit;
>
> You are both removing an identation level here because you are removing
> the compound statement which contained the psta declaration as well
> as refactoring the code.
>
> Please split this into 2 separate commits, 1 where you only drop the
> extra indentation level (and move the psta declaration up).
>
> And then a separate commit which just the actual code changes.
>
> Your current patch is very hard to review because you are doing
> 2 things at once.
>
> Also it looks like this patch depends on your previous patch:
> "[PATCH] staging: rtl8723bs: core: remove empty else section"
>
> When patches depend on each other please send them together
> as a single patch series. E.g. for version 2 (v2) of a 3 patch
> series consisting of the last 3 commits in your local tree use
> (so the next version of these patches) use:
>
> git format-patch -v2 --cover-letter HEAD~3
> $editor v2-0000-cover-letter.patch
>   <describe series contents + what was changed in the cover-letter>
> git send-email v2-00*.patch
>
> Regards,
>
> Hans
Sure, I will split this patch and resend all of them as a single patch 
series including my previous patch.

> > -			if (psta) {
> > -				psta->sta_xmitpriv.txseq_tid[pattrib->priority]++;
> > -				psta->sta_xmitpriv.txseq_tid[pattrib->priority] &= 0xFFF;
> > -				pattrib->seqnum = psta->sta_xmitpriv.txseq_tid[pattrib->priority];
> > +		psta->sta_xmitpriv.txseq_tid[pattrib->priority]++;
> > +		psta->sta_xmitpriv.txseq_tid[pattrib->priority] &= 0xFFF;
> > +		pattrib->seqnum = psta->sta_xmitpriv.txseq_tid[pattrib->priority];
> >
> > -				SetSeqNum(hdr, pattrib->seqnum);
> > +		SetSeqNum(hdr, pattrib->seqnum);
> >
> > -				/* check if enable ampdu */
> > -				if (pattrib->ht_en && psta->htpriv.ampdu_enable)
> > -					if (psta->htpriv.agg_enable_bitmap & BIT(pattrib->priority))
> > -						pattrib->ampdu_en = true;
> > +		/* check if enable ampdu */
> > +		if (pattrib->ht_en && psta->htpriv.ampdu_enable)
> > +			if (psta->htpriv.agg_enable_bitmap & BIT(pattrib->priority))
> > +				pattrib->ampdu_en = true;
> >
> > -				/* re-check if enable ampdu by BA_starting_seqctrl */
> > -				if (pattrib->ampdu_en == true) {
> > -					u16 tx_seq;
> > +		/* re-check if enable ampdu by BA_starting_seqctrl */
> > +		if (pattrib->ampdu_en == true) {
> > +			u16 tx_seq;
> >
> > -					tx_seq = psta->BA_starting_seqctrl[pattrib->priority & 0x0f];
> > +			tx_seq = psta->BA_starting_seqctrl[pattrib->priority & 0x0f];
> >
> > -					/* check BA_starting_seqctrl */
> > -					if (SN_LESS(pattrib->seqnum, tx_seq)) {
> > -						pattrib->ampdu_en = false;/* AGG BK */
> > -					} else if (SN_EQUAL(pattrib->seqnum, tx_seq)) {
> > -						psta->BA_starting_seqctrl[pattrib->priority & 0x0f] = (tx_seq+1)&0xfff;
> > +			/* check BA_starting_seqctrl */
> > +			if (SN_LESS(pattrib->seqnum, tx_seq)) {
> > +				pattrib->ampdu_en = false;/* AGG BK */
> > +			} else if (SN_EQUAL(pattrib->seqnum, tx_seq)) {
> > +				psta->BA_starting_seqctrl[pattrib->priority & 0x0f] = (tx_seq+1)&0xfff;
> >
> > -						pattrib->ampdu_en = true;/* AGG EN */
> > -					} else {
> > -						psta->BA_starting_seqctrl[pattrib->priority & 0x0f] = (pattrib->seqnum+1)&0xfff;
> > -						pattrib->ampdu_en = true;/* AGG EN */
> > -					}
> > -				}
> > +				pattrib->ampdu_en = true;/* AGG EN */
> > +			} else {
> > +				psta->BA_starting_seqctrl[pattrib->priority & 0x0f] = (pattrib->seqnum+1)&0xfff;
> > +				pattrib->ampdu_en = true;/* AGG EN */
> >   			}
> >   		}
> >   	}
> > --
> > 2.32.0

Thanks Hans for review.

Regards,
Saurav