On Tue, 2025-04-29 at 09:30 +0530, Roopni Devanathan wrote: > > #define NL80211_WIPHY_NAME_MAXLEN 64 > +#define NL80211_WIPHY_RADIO_ID_DEFAULT -1 I pointed this out before, that doesn't belong to the API. https://lore.kernel.org/linux-wireless/bef48349364854ba2ec42262e91b747028310a1c.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/ Please address comments or tell me why you disagree. > + if (info->attrs[NL80211_ATTR_WIPHY_RTS_THRESHOLD]) { > + rts_threshold = nla_get_u32( > + info->attrs[NL80211_ATTR_WIPHY_RTS_THRESHOLD]); > + changed |= WIPHY_PARAM_RTS_THRESHOLD; > + } > + > + if (changed) { > + old_rts_threshold = rdev->wiphy.radio_cfg[radio_id].rts_threshold; > + > + rdev->wiphy.radio_cfg[radio_id].rts_threshold = rts_threshold; > + > + result = rdev_set_wiphy_params(rdev, radio_id, changed); > + if (result) > + rdev->wiphy.radio_cfg[radio_id].rts_threshold = old_rts_threshold; > + } > + > + return result; nit: you could invert the "changed" test and save some indentation, those lines are pretty long. Then you can also not initialize "result=0" and "return 0" for the !changed case, which is more readable. > + old_radio_rts_threshold = kcalloc(rdev->wiphy.n_radio, > + sizeof(u32), > + GFP_KERNEL); > + if (!old_radio_rts_threshold) { > + kfree(old_radio_rts_threshold); > + return -ENOMEM; Hmm? Also doesn't that leak? johannes
