Re: [PATCH] net: wireless: ath: ath9k: remove unnecessary code

[Gustavo A. R. Silva]

Hi Kalle,

Quoting Kalle Valo <kvalo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:

> "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <garsilva@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
> > The name of an array used by itself will always return the array's address.
> > So this test will always evaluate as true.
> >
> > Addresses-Coverity-ID: 1364903
> > Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <garsilva@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> >  drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/eeprom.c | 2 +-
> >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/eeprom.c  
> > b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/eeprom.c
> > index fb80ec8..5c3bc28 100644
> > --- a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/eeprom.c
> > +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/eeprom.c
> > @@ -143,7 +143,7 @@ bool ath9k_hw_nvram_read(struct ath_hw *ah, u32  
> > off, u16 *data)
> >
> >  	if (ah->eeprom_blob)
> >  		ret = ath9k_hw_nvram_read_firmware(ah->eeprom_blob, off, data);
> > -	else if (pdata && !pdata->use_eeprom && pdata->eeprom_data)
> > +	else if (pdata && !pdata->use_eeprom)
> >  		ret = ath9k_hw_nvram_read_pdata(pdata, off, data);
> >  	else
> >  		ret = common->bus_ops->eeprom_read(common, off, data);
>
> The patch may very well be valid (didn't check yet) but the commit log
> is gibberish for me.

Let me correct that and I'll send the patch again.

Thanks!
--
Gustavo A. R. Silva