These macros both have the value 32, there's no point first
initializing align to a lower value.

If anything, one could throw in a
BUILD_BUG_ON(UCC_GETH_TX_BD_RING_ALIGNMENT < 4), but it's not worth it
- lots of code depends on named constants having sensible values.

Signed-off-by: Rasmus Villemoes <rasmus.villem...@prevas.dk>
---
 drivers/net/ethernet/freescale/ucc_geth.c | 8 ++------
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/freescale/ucc_geth.c 
b/drivers/net/ethernet/freescale/ucc_geth.c
index 273342233bba..ccde42f547b8 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ethernet/freescale/ucc_geth.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/freescale/ucc_geth.c
@@ -2196,9 +2196,7 @@ static int ucc_geth_alloc_tx(struct ucc_geth_private 
*ugeth)
                    UCC_GETH_TX_BD_RING_SIZE_MEMORY_ALIGNMENT)
                        length += UCC_GETH_TX_BD_RING_SIZE_MEMORY_ALIGNMENT;
                if (uf_info->bd_mem_part == MEM_PART_SYSTEM) {
-                       u32 align = 4;
-                       if (UCC_GETH_TX_BD_RING_ALIGNMENT > 4)
-                               align = UCC_GETH_TX_BD_RING_ALIGNMENT;
+                       u32 align = UCC_GETH_TX_BD_RING_ALIGNMENT;
                        ugeth->tx_bd_ring_offset[j] =
                                (u32) kmalloc((u32) (length + align), 
GFP_KERNEL);
 
@@ -2274,9 +2272,7 @@ static int ucc_geth_alloc_rx(struct ucc_geth_private 
*ugeth)
        for (j = 0; j < ug_info->numQueuesRx; j++) {
                length = ug_info->bdRingLenRx[j] * sizeof(struct qe_bd);
                if (uf_info->bd_mem_part == MEM_PART_SYSTEM) {
-                       u32 align = 4;
-                       if (UCC_GETH_RX_BD_RING_ALIGNMENT > 4)
-                               align = UCC_GETH_RX_BD_RING_ALIGNMENT;
+                       u32 align = UCC_GETH_RX_BD_RING_ALIGNMENT;
                        ugeth->rx_bd_ring_offset[j] =
                                (u32) kmalloc((u32) (length + align), 
GFP_KERNEL);
                        if (ugeth->rx_bd_ring_offset[j] != 0)
-- 
2.23.0

Reply via email to