Re: [PATCH v4] staging: rtl8723bs: Use % 4096u instead of & 0xfff
Andy Shevchenko <[email protected]> Mon, 7 Apr 2025 15:28:34 +0300
| Newsgroups | dev.linux.lists.outreachy,dev.linux.lists.linux-staging,org.kernel.vger.linux-kernel |
|---|---|
| Organization | Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - Westendinkatu 7, 02160 Espoo |
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Mon, Apr 07, 2025 at 01:21:15PM +0100, David Laight wrote: > On Mon, 7 Apr 2025 08:53:30 +0200 > Greg KH <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Mon, Apr 07, 2025 at 08:36:35AM +0200, Greg KH wrote: > > > On Mon, Apr 07, 2025 at 06:30:50AM +0000, Abraham Samuel Adekunle wrote: <snip> > > > > - psta->sta_xmitpriv.txseq_tid[pattrib->priority] &= 0xFFF; > > > > + psta->sta_xmitpriv.txseq_tid[pattrib->priority] &= 4096u; > > > > > > I do not see a modulo operation here, only another & operation. > > > > > > > pattrib->seqnum = psta->sta_xmitpriv.txseq_tid[pattrib->priority]; > > > > > > > > SetSeqNum(hdr, pattrib->seqnum); > > > > @@ -963,11 +963,11 @@ s32 rtw_make_wlanhdr(struct adapter *padapter, u8 *hdr, struct pkt_attrib *pattr > > > > if (SN_LESS(pattrib->seqnum, tx_seq)) { > > > > pattrib->ampdu_en = false;/* AGG BK */ > > > > } else if (SN_EQUAL(pattrib->seqnum, tx_seq)) { > > > > - psta->BA_starting_seqctrl[pattrib->priority & 0x0f] = (tx_seq+1)&0xfff; > > > > + psta->BA_starting_seqctrl[pattrib->priority & 0x0f] = (tx_seq+1)&4096u; > > > > > > This also looks odd, nothing is being "AND" here, it's an address value > > > being set (and an odd one at that, but that's another issue...) > > > > Sorry, no, I was wrong, it is being & here, but not %. My fault, > > the lack of spaces here threw me. > > It is still wrong '& 0xfff' => '% 4096u'. Why? > But it is all rather pointless especially if you can't test it. > Plausibly more useful would be to find ALL of the uses of 0xfff/4096 (I suspect > there is an array lurking somewhere) and change them to use the same constant. > But you need to be able to test the changes - or at least discover that > they make absolutely no difference to the generated object code. The problem with &, it's not non-power-of-2 tolerable solution. Also using hexadecimal there is not so helpful as when we are talking about sequences (or indices in the circular buffer), the decimal makes more sense. -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko