Re: [PATCH] x86/intel/quark: fix simple_return.cocci warnings

[Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>]

* Bryan O'Donoghue <pure.logic@nexus-software.ie> wrote:

> On 19/02/15 10:25, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> 
> >>>-	ret = iosf_mbi_read(QRK_MBI_UNIT_MM, QRK_MBI_MM_READ,
> >>>+	return iosf_mbi_read(QRK_MBI_UNIT_MM, QRK_MBI_MM_READ,
> >>>  				reg++, &imr->wmask);
> >>>-	if (ret)
> >>>-		return ret;
> >>>-
> >>>-	return 0;
> >>>  }
> >>>
> >>>  /**
> >>>
> >>
> >>This flow was a change asked for and supplied in review
> >>feedback for Andy Shevchenko so NAK to this patch.
> >
> >But this pattern:
> >
> >	if (ret)
> >		return ret;
> >
> >	return 0;
> >
> >makes very little sense. Why is it done?
> >
> >Thanks,
> >
> >	Ingo
> 
> Feedback at review was that it's more consistent with the 
> code that comes before.

But that feedback makes very little sense. In C we don't 
ever want to write:

	if (ret)
		return ret;

	return 0;

Because we can return the fine value straight away:

	return ret;

regardless of what comes before.

Thanks,

	Ingo