Re: [PATCH 1/3] staging: rtl8723bs: format comments

[Dan Carpenter]

On Sat, Feb 08, 2025 at 12:15:54AM -0800, Ian To wrote:
> Some comments were not formatted correctly. Reported by checkpatch.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Ian To <onlyian4981@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>  drivers/staging/rtl8723bs/core/rtw_security.c | 102 +++++++++---------
>  1 file changed, 51 insertions(+), 51 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/rtl8723bs/core/rtw_security.c b/drivers/staging/rtl8723bs/core/rtw_security.c
> index 1e9eff01b1aa..3281751436fd 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/rtl8723bs/core/rtw_security.c
> +++ b/drivers/staging/rtl8723bs/core/rtw_security.c
> @@ -30,10 +30,10 @@ const char *security_type_str(u8 value)
>  /* WEP related ===== */
>  
>  /*
> -	Need to consider the fragment  situation
> -*/
> + *	Need to consider the fragment  situation
> + */
>  void rtw_wep_encrypt(struct adapter *padapter, u8 *pxmitframe)
> -{																	/*  exclude ICV */
> +{								/*  exclude ICV */

What does this comment even mean?

> @@ -374,39 +374,38 @@ static void phase1(u16 *p1k, const u8 *tk, const u8 *ta, u32 iv32)
>  	/* size on the 80-bit block P1K[], using the 128-bit key TK[] */
>  	for (i = 0; i < PHASE1_LOOP_CNT; i++) {
>  		/* Each add operation here is mod 2**16 */
> -		p1k[0] += _S_(p1k[4] ^ TK16((i&1)+0));
> -		p1k[1] += _S_(p1k[0] ^ TK16((i&1)+2));
> -		p1k[2] += _S_(p1k[1] ^ TK16((i&1)+4));
> -		p1k[3] += _S_(p1k[2] ^ TK16((i&1)+6));
> -		p1k[4] += _S_(p1k[3] ^ TK16((i&1)+0));
> +		p1k[0] += _S_(p1k[4] ^ TK16((i & 1) + 0));
> +		p1k[1] += _S_(p1k[0] ^ TK16((i & 1) + 2));
> +		p1k[2] += _S_(p1k[1] ^ TK16((i & 1) + 4));
> +		p1k[3] += _S_(p1k[2] ^ TK16((i & 1) + 6));
> +		p1k[4] += _S_(p1k[3] ^ TK16((i & 1) + 0));

These aren't comments.

regards,
dan carpenter