Re: [PATCH] staging: r8188eu: remove unused variable and DBG_88E in hal/rtl8188e_cmd.c

[Phillip Potter <phil@philpotter.co.uk>]

On Mon, 16 Aug 2021 at 08:01, Fabio M. De Francesco
<fmdefrancesco@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Monday, August 16, 2021 8:55:06 AM CEST Fabio M. De Francesco wrote:
> > On Monday, August 16, 2021 1:05:18 AM CEST Phillip Potter wrote:
> > > Remove set but unused variable init_rate from rtl8188e_Add_RateATid
> > > function in hal/rtl8188e_cmd.c, as it fixes a kernel test robot warning.
> > > Removing the call to get_highest_rate_idx has no side effects here so is
> > > safe.
> > >
> > > Also remove the DBG_88E macro call in this function, as it is not
> > > particularly clear in my opinion. Additionally, rename variable
> > > shortGIrate to short_gi_rate to conform to kernel camel case rules,
> > > and improve general spacing around operators, some of which triggers
> > > checkpatch 'CHECK' messages. These are not related to the test robot
> > > warning.
> > >
> > > Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>
> > > Signed-off-by: Phillip Potter <phil@philpotter.co.uk>
> > > ---
> > >
> > >  drivers/staging/r8188eu/hal/rtl8188e_cmd.c | 22 +++++++---------------
> > >  1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
> >
> > Dear Philip,
> >
> > I'm sorry but, although every change here is fine, I cannot ack your patch
> as-
> > is. It shouldn't address so many different issues all at once, according to
> > the best practices in patching and the kernel development rules.
> >
> > I understand that you think that, while you are at the removal of
> "init_rate",
> > why shouldn't I address all other trivial issues at once?
> >
> > Even if the patch is short and it probably doesn't require particular hard
> > effort to review it, that mix-up of different works shouldn't be done,
> mainly
> > because this attitude could potentially lead you to add more and more
> > different work in future patches. Where is the limit? Why not add some more
> > different works next time you find some more problems into the same file/
> > directory?
> >
> > If I were you I'd, at least, prepare a series of two or three patches:
> >
> > 1/3 - Remove init_rate as reported by KTR;
> > 2/3 - Remove unneeded DBG_88E macro;
> > 3/3 - Do some clean-up of rtl8188e_cmd.c;
> >
> > Perhaps patches 2/3 and 3/3 could be merged into one, but I'm not really
> sure.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Fabio
>
> Furthermore, I forgot to say that the "Subject" should summarize with few
> words the whole work you do and in this case it is not what it does.
>
> Fabio
>
>
>

Dear Fabio,

Thank you for your feedback, I shall prepare a v2 series.

Regards,
Phil