Hi all,

While doing some static analysis I came across the following piece of code at 
drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtlwifi/btcoexist/halbtc8821a1ant.c:1581:

1581 static void btc8821a1ant_act_bt_sco_hid_only_busy(struct btc_coexist 
*btcoexist,
1582                                                   u8 wifi_status)
1583 {
1584         /* tdma and coex table */
1585         btc8821a1ant_ps_tdma(btcoexist, NORMAL_EXEC, true, 5);
1586 
1587         if (BT_8821A_1ANT_WIFI_STATUS_NON_CONNECTED_ASSO_AUTH_SCAN ==
1588             wifi_status)
1589                 btc8821a1ant_coex_table_with_type(btcoexist, NORMAL_EXEC, 
1);
1590         else
1591                 btc8821a1ant_coex_table_with_type(btcoexist, NORMAL_EXEC, 
1);
1592 }

The issue here is that the code for both branches of the if-else statement is 
identical.

The if-else was introduced a year ago in this commit c6821613e653

I wonder if an argument should be changed in any of the calls to 
btc8821a1ant_coex_table_with_type?

What do you think?

Thanks
--
Gustavo

Reply via email to