| Message ID | 1605239517-49707-1-git-send-email-alex.shi@linux.alibaba.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Accepted |
| Delegated to: | Netdev Maintainers |
| Headers | show |
| Series | net/nfc/nic: refined function nci_hci_resp_received | expand |
| Context | Check | Description |
|---|---|---|
| netdev/cover_letter | success | Link |
| netdev/fixes_present | success | Link |
| netdev/patch_count | success | Link |
| netdev/tree_selection | success | Guessed tree name to be net-next |
| netdev/subject_prefix | warning | Target tree name not specified in the subject |
| netdev/source_inline | success | Was 0 now: 0 |
| netdev/verify_signedoff | success | Link |
| netdev/module_param | success | Was 0 now: 0 |
| netdev/build_32bit | success | Errors and warnings before: 1 this patch: 0 |
| netdev/kdoc | success | Errors and warnings before: 0 this patch: 0 |
| netdev/verify_fixes | success | Link |
| netdev/checkpatch | success | total: 0 errors, 0 warnings, 0 checks, 26 lines checked |
| netdev/build_allmodconfig_warn | success | Errors and warnings before: 1 this patch: 0 |
| netdev/header_inline | success | Link |
| netdev/stable | success | Stable not CCed |
You had a typo in the subject nic -> nci. But really nfc: would be enough. On Fri, 13 Nov 2020 11:51:57 +0800 Alex Shi wrote: > We don't use the parameter result actually, so better to remove it and > skip a gcc warning for unused variable. > > Signed-off-by: Alex Shi <alex.shi@linux.alibaba.com> Let's CC the nfc list. nfc folks any reason the list is not mentioned under NFC SUBSYSTEM? > diff --git a/net/nfc/nci/hci.c b/net/nfc/nci/hci.c > index c18e76d6d8ba..6b275a387a92 100644 > --- a/net/nfc/nci/hci.c > +++ b/net/nfc/nci/hci.c > @@ -363,16 +363,13 @@ static void nci_hci_cmd_received(struct nci_dev *ndev, u8 pipe, > } > > static void nci_hci_resp_received(struct nci_dev *ndev, u8 pipe, > - u8 result, struct sk_buff *skb) > + struct sk_buff *skb) > { > struct nci_conn_info *conn_info; > - u8 status = result; > > conn_info = ndev->hci_dev->conn_info; > - if (!conn_info) { > - status = NCI_STATUS_REJECTED; > + if (!conn_info) > goto exit; > - } > > conn_info->rx_skb = skb; > LGTM based on the fact that commit d8cd37ed2fc8 ("NFC: nci: Fix improper management of HCI return code") started seemingly intentionally ignoring the status. Applied, thanks!
diff --git a/net/nfc/nci/hci.c b/net/nfc/nci/hci.c index c18e76d6d8ba..6b275a387a92 100644 --- a/net/nfc/nci/hci.c +++ b/net/nfc/nci/hci.c @@ -363,16 +363,13 @@ static void nci_hci_cmd_received(struct nci_dev *ndev, u8 pipe, } static void nci_hci_resp_received(struct nci_dev *ndev, u8 pipe, - u8 result, struct sk_buff *skb) + struct sk_buff *skb) { struct nci_conn_info *conn_info; - u8 status = result; conn_info = ndev->hci_dev->conn_info; - if (!conn_info) { - status = NCI_STATUS_REJECTED; + if (!conn_info) goto exit; - } conn_info->rx_skb = skb; @@ -388,7 +385,7 @@ static void nci_hci_hcp_message_rx(struct nci_dev *ndev, u8 pipe, { switch (type) { case NCI_HCI_HCP_RESPONSE: - nci_hci_resp_received(ndev, pipe, instruction, skb); + nci_hci_resp_received(ndev, pipe, skb); break; case NCI_HCI_HCP_COMMAND: nci_hci_cmd_received(ndev, pipe, instruction, skb);
We don't use the parameter result actually, so better to remove it and skip a gcc warning for unused variable. Signed-off-by: Alex Shi <alex.shi@linux.alibaba.com> Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net> Cc: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org> Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org --- net/nfc/nci/hci.c | 9 +++------ 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)