Re: [PATCH] staging: wilc1000: Merge memcpy + le32_to_cpus to get_unaligned_le32

[Ajay.Kathat]

On 7/19/2019 5:16 PM, Chuhong Yuan wrote:
> 
> <Ajay.Kathat@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> ä2019å7æ19æåä äå7:34åéï
>>
>> On 7/19/2019 1:40 PM, Chuhong Yuan wrote:
>>>
>>> Merge the combo use of memcpy and le32_to_cpus.
>>> Use get_unaligned_le32 instead.
>>> This simplifies the code.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Chuhong Yuan <hslester96@xxxxxxxxx>
>>> ---
>>>  drivers/staging/wilc1000/wilc_wfi_cfgoperations.c | 3 +--
>>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/staging/wilc1000/wilc_wfi_cfgoperations.c b/drivers/staging/wilc1000/wilc_wfi_cfgoperations.c
>>> index d72fdd333050..12fb4add05ec 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/staging/wilc1000/wilc_wfi_cfgoperations.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/staging/wilc1000/wilc_wfi_cfgoperations.c
>>> @@ -1038,8 +1038,7 @@ void wilc_wfi_p2p_rx(struct wilc_vif *vif, u8 *buff, u32 size)
>>>       s32 freq;
>>>       __le16 fc;
>>>
>>> -     memcpy(&header, (buff - HOST_HDR_OFFSET), HOST_HDR_OFFSET);
>>> -     le32_to_cpus(&header);
>>> +     header = get_unaligned_le32(buff - HOST_HDR_OFFSET);
>>>       pkt_offset = GET_PKT_OFFSET(header);
>>>
>>>       if (pkt_offset & IS_MANAGMEMENT_CALLBACK) {
>>>
>>
>> Thanks for sending the patches.
>>
>> The code change looks okay to me. Just a minor comment, avoid the use of
>> same subject line for different patches.
> 
> These two patches are in the same subsystem and solve the same problem.
> I splitted them into two patches by mistake since I did not notice the problems
> in the second patch when I sent the first one.
> Should I merge the two patches and resend?
> 

Yes, please go ahead, merge the patches and send the updated version.

Regards,
Ajay