From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from sipsolutions.net (s3.sipsolutions.net [168.119.38.16]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9D3032D59EF; Fri, 5 Sep 2025 07:16:19 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=168.119.38.16 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1757056584; cv=none; b=KTBXAdnorC03ppTUN6+0zA58mCGOcObF3743S6t4pIP5aOfo1V52xg2vvMFAIFCIYFXXQpt4syQAO5L81b4+7V+c8+JhLqPZ/n4AZYHiy9rxwQffIp4P6F84Q+w/VKb5NQHDaj6wap+rDyletfjVhpvkE0UjrxKNRMAfpKNcTMA= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1757056584; c=relaxed/simple; bh=+EJwsud1rgTat+Y4GCZMiC6IThHQFwuKXd3PJh5RPIY=; h=Message-ID:Subject:From:To:Cc:Date:In-Reply-To:References: Content-Type:MIME-Version; b=k5V90I4ZDruZthaPNMW1xd7X1dd4fjlkKkej14V5cqocsOVk9xIZMJPm/RKzYYE9c6Vw2yfO/KkFspTsJu0b8rpTP+8/FRV0ujMRoPscQSKcfJdGFk2Qm5nLGj8eT5IpSWkkf4W2Wunl1lPDJBzjBVcy4EBq/ppFSNga/mJACYA= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=sipsolutions.net; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=sipsolutions.net; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=sipsolutions.net header.i=@sipsolutions.net header.b=ZEUQbb3Y; arc=none smtp.client-ip=168.119.38.16 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=sipsolutions.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=sipsolutions.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=sipsolutions.net header.i=@sipsolutions.net header.b="ZEUQbb3Y" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sipsolutions.net; s=mail; h=MIME-Version:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-Type:References:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc:To:From:Subject:Message-ID:Sender :Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-To: Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID; bh=+EJwsud1rgTat+Y4GCZMiC6IThHQFwuKXd3PJh5RPIY=; t=1757056579; x=1758266179; b=ZEUQbb3YhzN9Wc717LRLQlL/0Fmw4GPV3hPQoZeWlYzMF4J 8nA5ZtAHaAkqVI1JZK3daL+4ex7cGI4goXmra3942MhSXCbkVmiXLQUCjcFLOOpRvnfmbZPQNH+qx 3lN9F54w9vqiZuUK8GJ4FQs9fEqt2SHA+WPB3ESVtii4KvS/xaefS0XgNgKn9aEQZUAYeFxJ3c3aX ZzMdD8gcB/XUim44xGHbNbfyWBB28S35YeGca0Tql5d4bIJjJijA5jzbGRyWJ0ElBLOYEtUJgarTj 4EB7NANazeA8YC6y0opIaLipE2sm9mwbfSUuDtQm2pb+S3oiRRPDxSQDdQ7yxe/A==; Received: by sipsolutions.net with esmtpsa (TLS1.3:ECDHE_X25519__RSA_PSS_RSAE_SHA256__AES_256_GCM:256) (Exim 4.98.2) (envelope-from ) id 1uuQgB-0000000GBoz-2vRR; Fri, 05 Sep 2025 09:16:15 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] wifi: cfg80211: Remove the redundant wiphy_dev From: Johannes Berg To: tanzheng Cc: arend.vanspriel@broadcom.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2025 09:16:14 +0200 In-Reply-To: <20250905063923.1170764-1-tanzheng@kylinos.cn> References: <20250905063923.1170764-1-tanzheng@kylinos.cn> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable User-Agent: Evolution 3.56.2 (3.56.2-2.fc42) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 X-malware-bazaar: not-scanned On Fri, 2025-09-05 at 14:39 +0800, tanzheng wrote: > There is no need to call wiphy_dev again.Simplifying the > code makes it more readable. >=20 > Signed-off-by: Zheng tan >=20 The bot complains this doesn't match your From: line, is that intentional? johannes