On Saturday 07 June 2014 16:30:19 Rickard Strandqvist wrote: > Expression '(X & 0xfc) == 0x3' is always false
While this is true, I believe that some other mistake is made. > I chose to remove this code, because it will not make any difference. > But obviously it is rather a properly designed if statement that is needed. > > This was partly found using a static code analysis program called cppcheck. > > Signed-off-by: Rickard Strandqvist <rickard_strandqv...@spectrumdigital.se> > --- > drivers/net/wireless/rtlwifi/rtl8192de/hw.c | 5 +---- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 4 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/rtlwifi/rtl8192de/hw.c > b/drivers/net/wireless/rtlwifi/rtl8192de/hw.c > index 2b08671..a1520d5 100644 > --- a/drivers/net/wireless/rtlwifi/rtl8192de/hw.c > +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/rtlwifi/rtl8192de/hw.c > @@ -1128,10 +1128,7 @@ static int _rtl92de_set_media_status(struct > ieee80211_hw *hw, > } > rtl_write_byte(rtlpriv, REG_CR + 2, bt_msr); > rtlpriv->cfg->ops->led_control(hw, ledaction); > - if ((bt_msr & 0xfc) == MSR_AP) If you look a few lines up, then you see that bt_msr is OR-ed with MSR_AP for AP interfaces. The 0xfc should be 0x03, see other drivers for example: rtl8723ae/hw.c:1112: if ((bt_msr & 0x03) == MSR_AP) rtl8723be/hw.c:1200: if ((bt_msr & 0x03) == MSR_AP) rtl8192cu/hw.c:1363: if ((bt_msr & 0xfc) == MSR_AP) rtl8192ce/hw.c:1209: if ((bt_msr & 0xfc) == MSR_AP) rtl8188ee/hw.c:1234: if ((bt_msr & 0xfc) == MSR_AP) rtl8192de/hw.c:1131: if ((bt_msr & 0xfc) == MSR_AP) > - rtl_write_byte(rtlpriv, REG_BCNTCFG + 1, 0x00); > - else > - rtl_write_byte(rtlpriv, REG_BCNTCFG + 1, 0x66); > + rtl_write_byte(rtlpriv, REG_BCNTCFG + 1, 0x66); > return 0; > } Kind regards, Peter -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
