From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-ed1-f53.google.com (mail-ed1-f53.google.com [209.85.208.53]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C212F2F9A for ; Thu, 29 Apr 2021 10:15:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-ed1-f53.google.com with SMTP id z5so41380548edr.11 for ; Thu, 29 Apr 2021 03:15:43 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=25ndHCz+X94ohhtLq4HJyXNxXOZ8od+mYUdpWBt4/ic=; b=J+SLskxXQrg0iHNvdPF75ucVX97uGG9Ef+g4DVYiD7lgmiNuRzN1VaOe2R3gp8cAIB ot5W6hbJ3uJL/s5AmZZqUcwtygtBUMvr4eYSwg362FluLSCSIHd18aAusP9DsFhOgAeN tc+HoWfGaNHDiw/Jb8IH7aGJV0tzUuL+oGDy/65hqJWRyikwMP3vhmLeS78eiW69L8Uh 1gGGbbkZjret72tN+Ef+HgBcWkk/VAb2h/UZrHdD1RKom+lymHifWxAR7WCE7teNo/Na d3PsBN9+caL0PSevMGwDxKneQmKpnFFwSBiCco+LrquIFHwnta/HyqnwW/nYI+osRf69 IM2g== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to :references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=25ndHCz+X94ohhtLq4HJyXNxXOZ8od+mYUdpWBt4/ic=; b=ZlgHmrqH4JQV8LF5QOM/q61t47sqIHslepdkMJrwulRiujIMzQ44NCTMNmaApCR7yB BrRSl7NRegZ1ZRe8B3Q9aq3lRG+q1Ob0hwpH/4KMdIS/blFdZtnIn0CcwYYriG2K3+ik Zx9hZ49/uLIww2ia0YvnfdayQpartGJeh2vgX7jCegE49VgIPtFGl1KwpfNlZIBg1Y86 NOrLv7ad4AZTLT8HOJhrxh3HDVv9ojvZeboLKu9Sm2DVmgsl13DXDmPFr+iIgaGRGbjx TgRECeBccDxautgmd8mjaPVHie+PagEurx6MdJWZiECwQilGPijMB93rlhRwltE6evCo fD0Q== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532SZn7lAER+iHkAY4qcNcWkgqjyj+3qcW6anHYrFB6W+aRQHhGG snqheSE6wHYGax25oMKtPNLQnyuekYBkNQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyNQchIwOeJgi3THa6gEtWcN/6fQ0E6WXL8k3RM68G8HblrIiIA6EO++zrI+C2LdgmJNESXQA== X-Received: by 2002:aa7:cc98:: with SMTP id p24mr17047726edt.187.1619691342277; Thu, 29 Apr 2021 03:15:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from linux.local (host-79-52-107-152.retail.telecomitalia.it. [79.52.107.152]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id i19sm1501301ejd.114.2021.04.29.03.15.41 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 29 Apr 2021 03:15:41 -0700 (PDT) From: "Fabio M. De Francesco" To: Fabio Aiuto , Greg Kroah-Hartman Cc: outreachy-kernel@googlegroups.com, linux-staging@lists.linux.dev, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [Outreachy kernel] [PATCH 1/2] staging: rtl8723bs: hal: Remove set but unused variables Date: Thu, 29 Apr 2021 12:15:40 +0200 Message-ID: <4187627.69DiqvND7d@linux.local> In-Reply-To: References: <20210428113346.28305-1-fmdefrancesco@gmail.com> <20210429082552.GC1409@agape.jhs> X-Mailing-List: linux-staging@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" On Thursday, April 29, 2021 12:01:45 PM CEST Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > On Thu, Apr 29, 2021 at 10:25:53AM +0200, Fabio Aiuto wrote: > > On Thu, Apr 29, 2021 at 09:44:47AM +0200, Fabio M. De Francesco wrote: > > > On Thursday, April 29, 2021 9:26:20 AM CEST Fabio Aiuto wrote: > > > > Hi Fabio, > > > > > > > > On Wed, Apr 28, 2021 at 01:33:45PM +0200, Fabio M. De Francesco wrote: > > > > > Removed four set but unused variables. Issue detected by gcc. > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Fabio M. De Francesco > > > > > --- > > > > > > > > > > drivers/staging/rtl8723bs/hal/rtl8723b_hal_init.c | 5 ----- > > > > > 1 file changed, 5 deletions(-) > > > > > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/staging/rtl8723bs/hal/rtl8723b_hal_init.c > > > > > b/drivers/staging/rtl8723bs/hal/rtl8723b_hal_init.c index > > > > > > 082448557b53..96cb4426a0f4 > > > > > > > > 100644 > > > > > --- a/drivers/staging/rtl8723bs/hal/rtl8723b_hal_init.c > > > > > +++ b/drivers/staging/rtl8723bs/hal/rtl8723b_hal_init.c > > > > > @@ -3900,14 +3900,11 @@ u8 GetHalDefVar8723B(struct adapter *padapter, > > > > > > enum > > > > > > > > hal_def_variable variable, v> > > > > > > > > > > u32 cmd; > > > > > u32 ra_info1, ra_info2; > > > > > u32 rate_mask1, rate_mask2; > > > > > > > > > > - u8 curr_tx_rate, curr_tx_sgi, hight_rate, > > > > > > lowest_rate; > > > > > > > > cmd = 0x40000100 | mac_id; > > > > > rtw_write32(padapter, > > > > > > REG_HMEBOX_DBG_2_8723B, cmd); > > > > > > > > msleep(10); > > > > > ra_info1 = rtw_read32(padapter, 0x2F0); > > > > > > > > > > - curr_tx_rate = ra_info1&0x7F; > > > > > - curr_tx_sgi = (ra_info1>>7)&0x01; > > > > > > > > > > cmd = 0x40000400 | mac_id; > > > > > rtw_write32(padapter, > > > > > > REG_HMEBOX_DBG_2_8723B, cmd); > > > > > > > > @@ -3916,8 +3913,6 @@ u8 GetHalDefVar8723B(struct adapter *padapter, enum > > > > > hal_def_variable variable, v> > > > > > > > > > > ra_info2 = rtw_read32(padapter, 0x2F4); > > > > > rate_mask1 = rtw_read32(padapter, 0x2F8); > > > > > rate_mask2 = rtw_read32(padapter, 0x2FC); > > > > > > > > > > - hight_rate = ra_info2&0xFF; > > > > > - lowest_rate = (ra_info2>>8) & 0xFF; > > > > > > > > > > } > > > > > break; > > > > > > > > rate_mask{1,2} and ra_info{1,2} seems to be unused as well. > > > > > > > > thank you, > > > > > > > > fabio > > > > > > Hello Fabio, > > > > > > I'm not sure about it: rtw_read32 calls a pointer to a function. I'm don't > > > know drivers programming, however that function looks like an implementation > > > of a read() system call. So I wouldn't be so sure to remove those calls. > > > > > > Could calling a (*read) method have side effects on subsequent read()? I mean: > > > could it update some internal data structure? If not I can remove the > > > variables you mentioned above and the calls to read32. > > > > > > I'm looking forward to read your reply. > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > Fabio > > > > hi Fabio, > > > > rtw_read32 is a macro wrapping _rtw_read32() defined as follows (in core/ rtw_io.c): > > > > u32 _rtw_read32(struct adapter *adapter, u32 addr) > > { > > > > u32 r_val; > > /* struct io_queue *pio_queue = (struct io_queue > > *)adapter->pio_queue; */ > > struct io_priv *pio_priv = &adapter->iopriv; > > struct intf_hdl *pintfhdl = &(pio_priv->intf); > > u32 (*_read32)(struct intf_hdl *pintfhdl, u32 addr); > > > > _read32 = pintfhdl->io_ops._read32; > > > > r_val = _read32(pintfhdl, addr); > > return rtw_le32_to_cpu(r_val); > > > > } > > > > the actual read seems to be performed by the handler contained in > > > > pintfhdl->io_ops._read32; > > > > so: > > > > $ grep -r '\b_read32' drivers/staging/rtl8723bs/ > > > > drivers/staging/rtl8723bs/hal/sdio_ops.c: ops->_read32 = &sdio_read32; > > > > this is the place where _read32 is stored with sdio_read32 reference... > > > > drivers/staging/rtl8723bs/core/rtw_io.c: u32 (*_read32)(struct intf_hdl *pintfhdl, u32 > > addr); drivers/staging/rtl8723bs/core/rtw_io.c: _read32 = pintfhdl- >io_ops._read32; > > ... > > > > if you check it in hal/sdio_ops.c, nothing is written, just reads are > > performed (and it's not odd, for a read function isn't supposed to write > > something under the hood ;)). > > Yes, but many types of hardware _REQUIRE_ reads to do something. So > "read that does nothing" is a requirement for some operations. > > As an example, a write is only guaranteed to have been finished if you > do a read of the same location back from it on some hardware busses. > The bus can reorder things, but a write/read of the same location can > not be reordered. > > Sometimes you have to do reads multiple times to get things to "stick". > > Other times reading from a location changes a state in the hardware > (horrid but HW designers aren't the brightest at times...) > > So you can NOT just remove reads without knowing that the hardware does > not require this. This is an issue where GCC "warnings" mean nothing as > gcc does not actually know what hardware does, or does not, do for many > things. > > thanks, > > greg k-h > Just to be sure... does it mean that v1 can be applied as-is? Thanks, Fabio