Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 27 Apr 2023 08:37:50 +0200 | Subject | Re: [PATCH net-next] wifi: ath11k: Use list_count_nodes() | From | Christophe JAILLET <> |
| |
Le 27/04/2023 à 06:35, Kalle Valo a écrit : > Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet-39ZsbGIQGT5GWvitb5QawA@public.gmane.org> writes: > >> ath11k_wmi_fw_stats_num_vdevs() and ath11k_wmi_fw_stats_num_bcn() really >> look the same as list_count_nodes(), so use the latter instead of hand >> writing it. >> >> The first ones use list_for_each_entry() and the other list_for_each(), but >> they both count the number of nodes in the list. >> >> While at it, also remove to prototypes of non-existent functions. >> Based on the names and prototypes, it is likely that they should be >> equivalent to list_count_nodes(). >> >> Signed-off-by: Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet-39ZsbGIQGT5GWvitb5QawA@public.gmane.org> >> --- >> Un-tested > > I'll run sanity tests on ath11k patches. I'll also add "Compile tested > only" to the commit log. > > Oh, and ath11k patches go to ath tree, not net-next. > Hi,
[adding Joe Perches]
maybe checkpatch could be instrumented for that?
Something that would print a warning if the MAINTAINERS file has a git repo in T: or if F: states something related to 'net'.
WARNING: Your patch is against the xxx.git repo but the subject of the mail does not reflect it. Should [PATCH xxx] be used instead? Also make sure that it applies cleanly on xxx.git to ease merge process.
WARNING: Your patch is related to 'net'. Such patches should state [PATCH net] when related to bug fix, or [PATCH net-next] otherwise.
Eventually, something if net-next is closed?
What do you think? Would it be possible? Would it help?
CJ
| |