[PATCH 00/20] drop useless LIST_HEAD

[PATCH 00/20] drop useless LIST_HEAD

[Julia Lawall]

Drop LIST_HEAD where the variable it declares is never used.

---

 drivers/dma/at_hdmac.c                                |    5 -----
 drivers/dma/dw/core.c                                 |    1 -
 drivers/dma/pl330.c                                   |    1 -
 drivers/dma/sa11x0-dma.c                              |    2 --
 drivers/dma/st_fdma.c                                 |    3 ---
 drivers/infiniband/ulp/ipoib/ipoib_ib.c               |    1 -
 drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx4/resource_tracker.c |    5 -----
 drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx5/core/en_tc.c       |    3 ---
 drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlxsw/spectrum.c        |    1 -
 drivers/net/wireless/st/cw1200/queue.c                |    1 -
 drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_nvme.c                         |    2 --
 drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_scsi.c                         |    2 --
 drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_sli.c                          |    1 -
 drivers/scsi/qla2xxx/qla_init.c                       |    1 -
 drivers/xen/xenbus/xenbus_dev_frontend.c              |    2 --
 fs/btrfs/relocation.c                                 |    1 -
 fs/nfs/nfs4client.c                                   |    1 -
 fs/nfsd/nfs4layouts.c                                 |    1 -
 fs/xfs/xfs_buf.c                                      |    1 -
 fs/xfs/xfs_fsops.c                                    |    1 -
 20 files changed, 36 deletions(-)

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

[PATCH 07/20] dmaengine: at_hdmac: drop useless LIST_HEAD

[Julia Lawall]

Drop LIST_HEAD where the variable it declares is never used.

tmp_list has been declared since the introduction of the driver
and has never been used.  The two declarations of list were
introduced with the containing functions but were also not used.

The semantic patch that fixes this problem is as follows:
(http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/)

// <smpl>
@@
identifier x;
@@
- LIST_HEAD(x);
  ... when != x
// </smpl>

Fixes: dc78baa2b90b ("dmaengine: at_hdmac: new driver for the Atmel AHB DMA Controller")
Fixes: 4facfe7f09f2b ("dmaengine: hdmac: Split device_control")
Signed-off-by: Julia Lawall <Julia.Lawall@lip6.fr>

---
Successfully 0-day tested on 151 configurations.

 drivers/dma/at_hdmac.c |    5 -----
 1 file changed, 5 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/dma/at_hdmac.c b/drivers/dma/at_hdmac.c
index 01d936c9fe89..a0a9cd76c1d4 100644
--- a/drivers/dma/at_hdmac.c
+++ b/drivers/dma/at_hdmac.c
@@ -134,7 +134,6 @@ static struct at_desc *atc_desc_get(struct at_dma_chan *atchan)
 	struct at_desc *ret = NULL;
 	unsigned long flags;
 	unsigned int i = 0;
-	LIST_HEAD(tmp_list);
 
 	spin_lock_irqsave(&atchan->lock, flags);
 	list_for_each_entry_safe(desc, _desc, &atchan->free_list, desc_node) {
@@ -1387,8 +1386,6 @@ static int atc_pause(struct dma_chan *chan)
 	int			chan_id = atchan->chan_common.chan_id;
 	unsigned long		flags;
 
-	LIST_HEAD(list);
-
 	dev_vdbg(chan2dev(chan), "%s\n", __func__);
 
 	spin_lock_irqsave(&atchan->lock, flags);
@@ -1408,8 +1405,6 @@ static int atc_resume(struct dma_chan *chan)
 	int			chan_id = atchan->chan_common.chan_id;
 	unsigned long		flags;
 
-	LIST_HEAD(list);
-
 	dev_vdbg(chan2dev(chan), "%s\n", __func__);
 
 	if (!atc_chan_is_paused(atchan))


_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

[PATCH 14/20] dmaengine: st_fdma: drop useless LIST_HEAD

[Julia Lawall]

Drop LIST_HEAD where the variable it declares is never used.

The declarations were introduced with the file, but the declared
variables were not used.

The semantic patch that fixes this problem is as follows:
(http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/)

// <smpl>
@@
identifier x;
@@
- LIST_HEAD(x);
  ... when != x
// </smpl>

Fixes: 6b4cd727eaf1 ("dmaengine: st_fdma: Add STMicroelectronics FDMA engine driver support")
Signed-off-by: Julia Lawall <Julia.Lawall@lip6.fr>

---
Successfully 0-day tested on 151 configurations.

 drivers/dma/st_fdma.c |    3 ---
 1 file changed, 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/dma/st_fdma.c b/drivers/dma/st_fdma.c
index 07c20aa2e955..954f7cf62bb1 100644
--- a/drivers/dma/st_fdma.c
+++ b/drivers/dma/st_fdma.c
@@ -294,8 +294,6 @@ static void st_fdma_free_chan_res(struct dma_chan *chan)
 	struct rproc *rproc = fchan->fdev->slim_rproc->rproc;
 	unsigned long flags;
 
-	LIST_HEAD(head);
-
 	dev_dbg(fchan->fdev->dev, "%s: freeing chan:%d\n",
 		__func__, fchan->vchan.chan.chan_id);
 
@@ -626,7 +624,6 @@ static void st_fdma_issue_pending(struct dma_chan *chan)
 static int st_fdma_pause(struct dma_chan *chan)
 {
 	unsigned long flags;
-	LIST_HEAD(head);
 	struct st_fdma_chan *fchan = to_st_fdma_chan(chan);
 	int ch_id = fchan->vchan.chan.chan_id;
 	unsigned long cmd = FDMA_CMD_PAUSE(ch_id);


_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

Re: [PATCH 00/20] drop useless LIST_HEAD

[Tom Psyborg]

Why do you CC this to so many lists?

On 23/12/2018, Julia Lawall <Julia.Lawall@lip6.fr> wrote:
> Drop LIST_HEAD where the variable it declares is never used.
>
> ---
>
>  drivers/dma/at_hdmac.c                                |    5 -----
>  drivers/dma/dw/core.c                                 |    1 -
>  drivers/dma/pl330.c                                   |    1 -
>  drivers/dma/sa11x0-dma.c                              |    2 --
>  drivers/dma/st_fdma.c                                 |    3 ---
>  drivers/infiniband/ulp/ipoib/ipoib_ib.c               |    1 -
>  drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx4/resource_tracker.c |    5 -----
>  drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx5/core/en_tc.c       |    3 ---
>  drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlxsw/spectrum.c        |    1 -
>  drivers/net/wireless/st/cw1200/queue.c                |    1 -
>  drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_nvme.c                         |    2 --
>  drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_scsi.c                         |    2 --
>  drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_sli.c                          |    1 -
>  drivers/scsi/qla2xxx/qla_init.c                       |    1 -
>  drivers/xen/xenbus/xenbus_dev_frontend.c              |    2 --
>  fs/btrfs/relocation.c                                 |    1 -
>  fs/nfs/nfs4client.c                                   |    1 -
>  fs/nfsd/nfs4layouts.c                                 |    1 -
>  fs/xfs/xfs_buf.c                                      |    1 -
>  fs/xfs/xfs_fsops.c                                    |    1 -
>  20 files changed, 36 deletions(-)
>

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

Re: [PATCH 00/20] drop useless LIST_HEAD

[Julia Lawall]

On Sun, 23 Dec 2018, Tom Psyborg wrote:

> Why do you CC this to so many lists?

Because the different files are in different subsystems.  The cover letter
goes to a list for each file, or to a person if there is no list.  The
patches go to the people and lists associated with the affected files.

julia

>
> On 23/12/2018, Julia Lawall <Julia.Lawall@lip6.fr> wrote:
> > Drop LIST_HEAD where the variable it declares is never used.
> >
> > ---
> >
> >  drivers/dma/at_hdmac.c                                |    5 -----
> >  drivers/dma/dw/core.c                                 |    1 -
> >  drivers/dma/pl330.c                                   |    1 -
> >  drivers/dma/sa11x0-dma.c                              |    2 --
> >  drivers/dma/st_fdma.c                                 |    3 ---
> >  drivers/infiniband/ulp/ipoib/ipoib_ib.c               |    1 -
> >  drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx4/resource_tracker.c |    5 -----
> >  drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx5/core/en_tc.c       |    3 ---
> >  drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlxsw/spectrum.c        |    1 -
> >  drivers/net/wireless/st/cw1200/queue.c                |    1 -
> >  drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_nvme.c                         |    2 --
> >  drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_scsi.c                         |    2 --
> >  drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_sli.c                          |    1 -
> >  drivers/scsi/qla2xxx/qla_init.c                       |    1 -
> >  drivers/xen/xenbus/xenbus_dev_frontend.c              |    2 --
> >  fs/btrfs/relocation.c                                 |    1 -
> >  fs/nfs/nfs4client.c                                   |    1 -
> >  fs/nfsd/nfs4layouts.c                                 |    1 -
> >  fs/xfs/xfs_buf.c                                      |    1 -
> >  fs/xfs/xfs_fsops.c                                    |    1 -
> >  20 files changed, 36 deletions(-)
> >
>

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

Re: [PATCH 07/20] dmaengine: at_hdmac: drop useless LIST_HEAD

[Ludovic Desroches]

On Sun, Dec 23, 2018 at 09:57:02AM +0100, Julia Lawall wrote:
> Drop LIST_HEAD where the variable it declares is never used.
> 
> tmp_list has been declared since the introduction of the driver
> and has never been used.  The two declarations of list were
> introduced with the containing functions but were also not used.
> 
> The semantic patch that fixes this problem is as follows:
> (http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/)
> 
> // <smpl>
> @@
> identifier x;
> @@
> - LIST_HEAD(x);
>   ... when != x
> // </smpl>
> 
> Fixes: dc78baa2b90b ("dmaengine: at_hdmac: new driver for the Atmel AHB DMA Controller")
> Fixes: 4facfe7f09f2b ("dmaengine: hdmac: Split device_control")
> Signed-off-by: Julia Lawall <Julia.Lawall@lip6.fr>
Acked-by: Ludovic Desroches <ludovic.desroches@microchip.com> 

Thanks
> 
> ---
> Successfully 0-day tested on 151 configurations.
> 
>  drivers/dma/at_hdmac.c |    5 -----
>  1 file changed, 5 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/dma/at_hdmac.c b/drivers/dma/at_hdmac.c
> index 01d936c9fe89..a0a9cd76c1d4 100644
> --- a/drivers/dma/at_hdmac.c
> +++ b/drivers/dma/at_hdmac.c
> @@ -134,7 +134,6 @@ static struct at_desc *atc_desc_get(struct at_dma_chan *atchan)
>  	struct at_desc *ret = NULL;
>  	unsigned long flags;
>  	unsigned int i = 0;
> -	LIST_HEAD(tmp_list);
>  
>  	spin_lock_irqsave(&atchan->lock, flags);
>  	list_for_each_entry_safe(desc, _desc, &atchan->free_list, desc_node) {
> @@ -1387,8 +1386,6 @@ static int atc_pause(struct dma_chan *chan)
>  	int			chan_id = atchan->chan_common.chan_id;
>  	unsigned long		flags;
>  
> -	LIST_HEAD(list);
> -
>  	dev_vdbg(chan2dev(chan), "%s\n", __func__);
>  
>  	spin_lock_irqsave(&atchan->lock, flags);
> @@ -1408,8 +1405,6 @@ static int atc_resume(struct dma_chan *chan)
>  	int			chan_id = atchan->chan_common.chan_id;
>  	unsigned long		flags;
>  
> -	LIST_HEAD(list);
> -
>  	dev_vdbg(chan2dev(chan), "%s\n", __func__);
>  
>  	if (!atc_chan_is_paused(atchan))
> 

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

Re: [PATCH 00/20] drop useless LIST_HEAD

[Tom Psyborg]

there was discussion about this just some days ago. CC 4-5 lists is
more than enough

On 23/12/2018, Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@lip6.fr> wrote:
>
>
> On Sun, 23 Dec 2018, Tom Psyborg wrote:
>
>> Why do you CC this to so many lists?
>
> Because the different files are in different subsystems.  The cover letter
> goes to a list for each file, or to a person if there is no list.  The
> patches go to the people and lists associated with the affected files.
>
> julia
>
>>
>> On 23/12/2018, Julia Lawall <Julia.Lawall@lip6.fr> wrote:
>> > Drop LIST_HEAD where the variable it declares is never used.
>> >
>> > ---
>> >
>> >  drivers/dma/at_hdmac.c                                |    5 -----
>> >  drivers/dma/dw/core.c                                 |    1 -
>> >  drivers/dma/pl330.c                                   |    1 -
>> >  drivers/dma/sa11x0-dma.c                              |    2 --
>> >  drivers/dma/st_fdma.c                                 |    3 ---
>> >  drivers/infiniband/ulp/ipoib/ipoib_ib.c               |    1 -
>> >  drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx4/resource_tracker.c |    5 -----
>> >  drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx5/core/en_tc.c       |    3 ---
>> >  drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlxsw/spectrum.c        |    1 -
>> >  drivers/net/wireless/st/cw1200/queue.c                |    1 -
>> >  drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_nvme.c                         |    2 --
>> >  drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_scsi.c                         |    2 --
>> >  drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_sli.c                          |    1 -
>> >  drivers/scsi/qla2xxx/qla_init.c                       |    1 -
>> >  drivers/xen/xenbus/xenbus_dev_frontend.c              |    2 --
>> >  fs/btrfs/relocation.c                                 |    1 -
>> >  fs/nfs/nfs4client.c                                   |    1 -
>> >  fs/nfsd/nfs4layouts.c                                 |    1 -
>> >  fs/xfs/xfs_buf.c                                      |    1 -
>> >  fs/xfs/xfs_fsops.c                                    |    1 -
>> >  20 files changed, 36 deletions(-)
>> >
>>
>

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

Re: [PATCH 00/20] drop useless LIST_HEAD

[Dan Carpenter]

On Tue, Dec 25, 2018 at 11:12:20PM +0100, Tom Psyborg wrote:
> there was discussion about this just some days ago. CC 4-5 lists is
> more than enough
> 

I don't know who you were discussing this with...

You should CC the 0th patch to all the mailinglists.  That much is a
clear rule.

For the rest, Julia's position is the more conservative one.  I was in
a conversation in RL and they were like, "CC everyone for all the
patches".  It depends on the context, of course.  If the patches are
dependent on each other then you *have* to CC everyone for everything.

If we really have other clear rules, then it should be encoded into
get_maintainer.pl so that it's automatic.

My other question is why do the linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
people feel like they need to be CC'd about every driver???  I always
remove them from the CC list unless it's an arch/arm issue.

regards,
dan carpenter

PS:  Please, no more top posting.


_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

Re: [PATCH 00/20] drop useless LIST_HEAD

[Darrick J. Wong]

On Thu, Dec 27, 2018 at 04:40:55PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 25, 2018 at 11:12:20PM +0100, Tom Psyborg wrote:
> > there was discussion about this just some days ago. CC 4-5 lists is
> > more than enough
> > 
> 
> I don't know who you were discussing this with...
> 
> You should CC the 0th patch to all the mailinglists.  That much is a
> clear rule.
> 
> For the rest, Julia's position is the more conservative one.  I was in
> a conversation in RL and they were like, "CC everyone for all the
> patches".  It depends on the context, of course.  If the patches are
> dependent on each other then you *have* to CC everyone for everything.

Agreed.  Ms. Lawall, sending "Cover letter + all relevant XFS patches"
(as you did) was exactly the right thing for us xfs types. :)

For that matter, we prefer to receive through linux-xfs more patches
than necessary (one can send the entire series if one is unsure) than to
go wanting for more context.

--D

> If we really have other clear rules, then it should be encoded into
> get_maintainer.pl so that it's automatic.
> 
> My other question is why do the linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
> people feel like they need to be CC'd about every driver???  I always
> remove them from the CC list unless it's an arch/arm issue.
> 
> regards,
> dan carpenter
> 
> PS:  Please, no more top posting.
> 

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

Re: [PATCH 00/20] drop useless LIST_HEAD

[Julia Lawall]

On Fri, 28 Dec 2018, Darrick J. Wong wrote:

> On Thu, Dec 27, 2018 at 04:40:55PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 25, 2018 at 11:12:20PM +0100, Tom Psyborg wrote:
> > > there was discussion about this just some days ago. CC 4-5 lists is
> > > more than enough
> > >
> >
> > I don't know who you were discussing this with...
> >
> > You should CC the 0th patch to all the mailinglists.  That much is a
> > clear rule.
> >
> > For the rest, Julia's position is the more conservative one.  I was in
> > a conversation in RL and they were like, "CC everyone for all the
> > patches".  It depends on the context, of course.  If the patches are
> > dependent on each other then you *have* to CC everyone for everything.
>
> Agreed.  Ms. Lawall, sending "Cover letter + all relevant XFS patches"
> (as you did) was exactly the right thing for us xfs types. :)
>
> For that matter, we prefer to receive through linux-xfs more patches
> than necessary (one can send the entire series if one is unsure) than to
> go wanting for more context.

Thanks for the confirmation.  I was planning to ignore the 4-5 advice,
because there is no way in this case to make a meaningful 4-5 list
suggestion - it's either all or nothing.  But 20 patches at once is
perhaps a lot as well.  In this case, I just wanted to get rid of the
whole issue at once.

julia

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel