On 2019/9/13 1:45, Kalle Valo wrote:
> zhong jiang <zhongji...@huawei.com> writes:
>
>> il4965_set_tkip_dynamic_key_info  do not need return value to
>> cope with different ases. And change functon return type to void.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: zhong jiang <zhongji...@huawei.com>
>> ---
>>  drivers/net/wireless/intel/iwlegacy/4965-mac.c | 8 ++------
>>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/intel/iwlegacy/4965-mac.c 
>> b/drivers/net/wireless/intel/iwlegacy/4965-mac.c
>> index ffb705b..a7bbfe2 100644
>> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/intel/iwlegacy/4965-mac.c
>> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/intel/iwlegacy/4965-mac.c
>> @@ -3326,12 +3326,11 @@ struct il_mod_params il4965_mod_params = {
>>      return il_send_add_sta(il, &sta_cmd, CMD_SYNC);
>>  }
>>  
>> -static int
>> +static void
>>  il4965_set_tkip_dynamic_key_info(struct il_priv *il,
>>                               struct ieee80211_key_conf *keyconf, u8 sta_id)
>>  {
>>      unsigned long flags;
>> -    int ret = 0;
>>      __le16 key_flags = 0;
>>  
>>      key_flags |= (STA_KEY_FLG_TKIP | STA_KEY_FLG_MAP_KEY_MSK);
>> @@ -3367,8 +3366,6 @@ struct il_mod_params il4965_mod_params = {
>>      memcpy(il->stations[sta_id].sta.key.key, keyconf->key, 16);
>>  
>>      spin_unlock_irqrestore(&il->sta_lock, flags);
>> -
>> -    return ret;
>>  }
>>  
>>  void
>> @@ -3483,8 +3480,7 @@ struct il_mod_params il4965_mod_params = {
>>                  il4965_set_ccmp_dynamic_key_info(il, keyconf, sta_id);
>>              break;
>>      case WLAN_CIPHER_SUITE_TKIP:
>> -            ret =
>> -                il4965_set_tkip_dynamic_key_info(il, keyconf, sta_id);
>> +            il4965_set_tkip_dynamic_key_info(il, keyconf, sta_id);
>>              break;
>>      case WLAN_CIPHER_SUITE_WEP40:
>>      case WLAN_CIPHER_SUITE_WEP104:
> To me this looks inconsistent with the rest of the cases in the switch
> statement. And won't we then return the ret variable uninitalised?
Yep,  I miss that.   please ignore the patch.  Thanks,

Sincerely,
zhong jiang

Reply via email to