On 2/9/2026 6:12 PM, Richard Acayan wrote:
some nits from my tooling...
> @@ -3299,16 +3302,32 @@ static int ath10k_htt_rx_in_ord_ind(struct ath10k
> *ar, struct sk_buff *skb)
> return -EINVAL;
> }
>
> + if (!skb_queue_empty(&htt->rx_in_ord_split)) {
> + /* It might still be possible to handle this case if there is
note that networking code no longer has a special block comment style, so all
new block comments should use the standard style which has the opening "/*" on
a line by itself.
> + * only one peer that splits at each given moment. We are
> + * bailing out because we should have a test case for this
> + * before trying to fix it.
> + */
> + if (tid != htt->rx_in_ord_split_tid
> + || peer_id != htt->rx_in_ord_split_peer_id
> + || offload) {
checkpatch complains:
LOGICAL_CONTINUATIONS: Logical continuations should be on the previous line
LOGICAL_CONTINUATIONS: Logical continuations should be on the previous line
> + ath10k_warn(ar, "split amsdu did not resume
> immediately\n");
> + htt->rx_confused = true;
> + return -EIO;
> + }
> + }
> +
Just wanted to get those out of the way before I look at the real content of
the patch.
/jeff
