wlcore_fw_status() is passed a pointer to the struct wl_fw_status to
decode the status into, which is always wl->fw_status. Rather than
referencing wl->fw_status within wlcore_fw_status(), use the supplied
argument so that we access this member in a consistent manner.

Signed-off-by: Russell King (Oracle) <rmk+kernel@armlinux.org.uk>
---
 drivers/net/wireless/ti/wlcore/main.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/ti/wlcore/main.c b/drivers/net/wireless/ti/wlcore/main.c
index a98b26dc3cb8..3defe49c5120 100644
--- a/drivers/net/wireless/ti/wlcore/main.c
+++ b/drivers/net/wireless/ti/wlcore/main.c
@@ -392,7 +392,7 @@ static int wlcore_fw_status(struct wl1271 *wl, struct wl_fw_status *status)
 	if (ret < 0)
 		return ret;
 
-	wlcore_hw_convert_fw_status(wl, wl->raw_fw_status, wl->fw_status);
+	wlcore_hw_convert_fw_status(wl, wl->raw_fw_status, status);
 
 	wl1271_debug(DEBUG_IRQ, "intr: 0x%x (fw_rx_counter = %d, "
 		     "drv_rx_counter = %d, tx_results_counter = %d)",
-- 
2.30.2

On 5/28/2024 12:17 PM, Russell King (Oracle) wrote:
> wlcore_fw_status() is passed a pointer to the struct wl_fw_status to
> decode the status into, which is always wl->fw_status. Rather than
> referencing wl->fw_status within wlcore_fw_status(), use the supplied
> argument so that we access this member in a consistent manner.
>
> Signed-off-by: Russell King (Oracle) <rmk+kernel@armlinux.org.uk>
> ---
>    drivers/net/wireless/ti/wlcore/main.c | 2 +-
>    1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/ti/wlcore/main.c b/drivers/net/wireless/ti/wlcore/main.c
> index a98b26dc3cb8..3defe49c5120 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/ti/wlcore/main.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/ti/wlcore/main.c
> @@ -392,7 +392,7 @@ static int wlcore_fw_status(struct wl1271 *wl, struct wl_fw_status *status)
>    	if (ret < 0)
>    		return ret;
>    
> -	wlcore_hw_convert_fw_status(wl, wl->raw_fw_status, wl->fw_status);
> +	wlcore_hw_convert_fw_status(wl, wl->raw_fw_status, status);
>    
>    	wl1271_debug(DEBUG_IRQ, "intr: 0x%x (fw_rx_counter = %d, "
>    		     "drv_rx_counter = %d, tx_results_counter = %d)",
> -- 
> 2.30.2

Agree this is more consistent. Maybe *status shouldn't be an argument to 
wlcore_fw_status at all? It's called only in one place with 
wl->fw_status anyway.

Michael.

On Wed, May 29, 2024 at 04:15:13PM +0300, Nemanov, Michael wrote:
> On 5/28/2024 12:17 PM, Russell King (Oracle) wrote:
> > @@ -392,7 +392,7 @@ static int wlcore_fw_status(struct wl1271 *wl, struct wl_fw_status *status)
> >    	if (ret < 0)
> >    		return ret;
> > -	wlcore_hw_convert_fw_status(wl, wl->raw_fw_status, wl->fw_status);
> > +	wlcore_hw_convert_fw_status(wl, wl->raw_fw_status, status);
> >    	wl1271_debug(DEBUG_IRQ, "intr: 0x%x (fw_rx_counter = %d, "
> >    		     "drv_rx_counter = %d, tx_results_counter = %d)",
> > -- 
> > 2.30.2
> 
> Agree this is more consistent. Maybe *status shouldn't be an argument to
> wlcore_fw_status at all? It's called only in one place with wl->fw_status
> anyway.

I did consider that, and if we removed the argument, it would make sense
to add a local "status" variable at the top of this function anyway,
otherwise endlessly referring to wl->fw_status.foo instead of
status->foo becomes quite tiring and needlessly verbose (which means
less readable.)

That's something which could be done as a separate patch.

-- 
RMK's Patch system: https://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/
FTTP is here! 80Mbps down 10Mbps up. Decent connectivity at last!