Re: if_wm.c: is this a bug, or am I missing something?

[Masanobu SAITOH <msaitoh%execsw.org@localhost>]

On 2018/04/21 3:55, Mouse wrote:
> I'm trying to write some bare-metal code (no OS) for a chip that
> appears to be supported by if_wm.c, but for which the manufacturer's
> documentation PDF is cripplingly broken, leading to my reading over
> that file, trying to use it as hardware documentation of a sort...and I
> see something odd which looks to me like a bug.  I'm wondering whether
> it is or whether I'm just missing something.
>
> In wm_get_swfw_semaphore, I find (lines 12961-12966 of 1.562)
>
>          if (sc->sc_type == WM_T_80003)
>                  timeout = 50;
>          else
>                  timeout = 200;
>
>          for (timeout = 0; timeout < 200; timeout++) {
>
> Given the first part of the for loop ("timeout = 0"), it looks to me as
> though the assignments to timeout above it, and the test controlling
> which assignment happens, are completely useless.  If I had to guess,
> I'd guess the test and assignments were designed for a loop more like
> for (;timeout>0;timeout--).
>
> Is the bug in the code?  Or in my brain?

 You're correct!

 It have been fixed now (in if_wm.c rev 1.575).

Thanks!

> /~\ The ASCII				  Mouse
> \ / Ribbon Campaign
>   X  Against HTML		mouse%rodents-montreal.org@localhost
> / \ Email!	     7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39  4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B


--
-----------------------------------------------
                SAITOH Masanobu (msaitoh%execsw.org@localhost
                                 msaitoh%netbsd.org@localhost)