* [PATCH] iommu: remove unnecessary code
@ 2017-05-11 3:49 Gustavo A. R. Silva
2017-05-11 8:01 ` David Woodhouse
0 siblings, 1 reply; 2+ messages in thread
From: Gustavo A. R. Silva @ 2017-05-11 3:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: David Woodhouse, Joerg Roedel; +Cc: iommu, linux-kernel, Gustavo A. R. Silva
did_old is an unsigned variable and, greater-than-or-equal-to-zero
comparison of an unsigned variable is always true.
Addresses-Coverity-ID: 1398477
Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <garsilva@embeddedor.com>
---
drivers/iommu/intel-iommu.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/iommu/intel-iommu.c b/drivers/iommu/intel-iommu.c
index d412a31..98daf4a 100644
--- a/drivers/iommu/intel-iommu.c
+++ b/drivers/iommu/intel-iommu.c
@@ -2050,7 +2050,7 @@ static int domain_context_mapping_one(struct dmar_domain *domain,
if (context_copied(context)) {
u16 did_old = context_domain_id(context);
- if (did_old >= 0 && did_old < cap_ndoms(iommu->cap))
+ if (did_old < cap_ndoms(iommu->cap))
iommu->flush.flush_context(iommu, did_old,
(((u16)bus) << 8) | devfn,
DMA_CCMD_MASK_NOBIT,
--
2.5.0
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH] iommu: remove unnecessary code
2017-05-11 3:49 [PATCH] iommu: remove unnecessary code Gustavo A. R. Silva
@ 2017-05-11 8:01 ` David Woodhouse
0 siblings, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: David Woodhouse @ 2017-05-11 8:01 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Gustavo A. R. Silva, Joerg Roedel
Cc: iommu-cunTk1MwBs9QetFLy7KEm3xJsTq8ys+cHZ5vskTnxNA,
linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA
[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1494 bytes --]
On Wed, 2017-05-10 at 22:49 -0500, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote:
> did_old is an unsigned variable and, greater-than-or-equal-to-zero
> comparison of an unsigned variable is always true.
>
> Addresses-Coverity-ID: 1398477
> Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <garsilva-L1vi/lXTdts+Va1GwOuvDg@public.gmane.org>
So... why do you think that check was there? Do you think it's possible
that someone mistakenly *thought* it could be negative? What were they
actually checking for? Have you actually *fixed* a bug here, or have
you just masked it?
Even if you've done all that analysis and it *is* correct just to drop
the comparison rather than fixing it, you need to put verbiage to that
effect into the commit comment.
Never write patches to "fix warnings". Always to fix bugs.
> ---
> drivers/iommu/intel-iommu.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/iommu/intel-iommu.c b/drivers/iommu/intel-iommu.c
> index d412a31..98daf4a 100644
> --- a/drivers/iommu/intel-iommu.c
> +++ b/drivers/iommu/intel-iommu.c
> @@ -2050,7 +2050,7 @@ static int domain_context_mapping_one(struct dmar_domain *domain,
> if (context_copied(context)) {
> u16 did_old = context_domain_id(context);
>
> - if (did_old >= 0 && did_old < cap_ndoms(iommu->cap))
> + if (did_old < cap_ndoms(iommu->cap))
> iommu->flush.flush_context(iommu, did_old,
> (((u16)bus) << 8) | devfn,
> DMA_CCMD_MASK_NOBIT,
[-- Attachment #1.2: smime.p7s --]
[-- Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature, Size: 4938 bytes --]
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 0 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2017-05-11 8:01 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2017-05-11 3:49 [PATCH] iommu: remove unnecessary code Gustavo A. R. Silva
2017-05-11 8:01 ` David Woodhouse
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).