Re: [PATCH 1/2] staging: rtl8723bs: Optimize variable initialization in rtl8723b_hal_init.c
Erick Karanja <[email protected]> Sat, 05 Apr 2025 17:43:35 +0300
| Newsgroups | dev.linux.lists.outreachy,dev.linux.lists.linux-staging,org.kernel.vger.linux-kernel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Sat, 2025-04-05 at 10:28 -0400, Julia Lawall wrote: > > > On 5 Apr 2025, at 10:19, Dan Carpenter <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > On Sat, Apr 05, 2025 at 06:14:48AM +0300, Erick Karanja wrote: > > > Optimize variable initialization by integrating the > > > initialization > > > directly into the variable declaration in cases where the > > > initialization > > > is simple and doesn't depend on other variables or complex > > > expressions. > > > This makes the code more concise and readable. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Erick Karanja <[email protected]> > > > --- > > > .../staging/rtl8723bs/hal/rtl8723b_hal_init.c | 155 +++++-------- > > > ----- > > > 1 file changed, 41 insertions(+), 114 deletions(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/staging/rtl8723bs/hal/rtl8723b_hal_init.c > > > b/drivers/staging/rtl8723bs/hal/rtl8723b_hal_init.c > > > index e15ec6452fd0..1e980b291e90 100644 > > > --- a/drivers/staging/rtl8723bs/hal/rtl8723b_hal_init.c > > > +++ b/drivers/staging/rtl8723bs/hal/rtl8723b_hal_init.c > > > @@ -152,13 +152,12 @@ static int _WriteFW(struct adapter > > > *padapter, void *buffer, u32 size) > > > void _8051Reset8723(struct adapter *padapter) > > > { > > > u8 cpu_rst; > > > - u8 io_rst; > > > + u8 io_rst = rtw_read8(padapter, REG_RSV_CTRL + 1); > > > > > > > > > /* Reset 8051(WLMCU) IO wrapper */ > > > /* 0x1c[8] = 0 */ > > > /* Suggested by Isaac@SD1 and Gimmy@SD1, coding by > > > Lucas@20130624 */ > > > - io_rst = rtw_read8(padapter, REG_RSV_CTRL+1); > > > io_rst &= ~BIT(0); > > > rtw_write8(padapter, REG_RSV_CTRL+1, io_rst); > > > > I hate this. It's a bad idea to put "code" in the declaration > > block. > > Erick, you can look around in the output of the semantic patch and > see if all of the ones with function calls are undesirable. If that’s > the case you can post to the outreachy mailing list a revised > semantic patch that doesn’t report on that case. Thanks Julia I will look at it. > > Julia > > > > @@ -501,8 +499,7 @@ void Hal_GetEfuseDefinition( > > > switch (type) { > > > case TYPE_EFUSE_MAX_SECTION: > > > { > > > - u8 *pMax_section; > > > - pMax_section = pOut; > > > + u8 *pMax_section = pOut; > > > > This is fine because "pOut" is a variable. It doesn't have side > > effects > > and it's not "code" in that sense. > > > > regards, > > dan carpenter > > > > >