Re: [PATCH rdma-next 1/2] RDMA/uverbs: Remove redundant assignments

[Leon Romanovsky <leon@kernel.org>]

On Mon, Jul 20, 2020 at 11:27:55AM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 19, 2020 at 04:27:33PM +0300, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> > On Sun, Jul 19, 2020 at 04:21:04PM +0300, Gal Pressman wrote:
> > > On 19/07/2020 9:03, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> > > > From: Leon Romanovsky <leonro@mellanox.com>
> > > >
> > > > The kbuild reported the following warning, so clean whole uverbs_cmd.c file.
> > > >
> > > >    drivers/infiniband/core/uverbs_cmd.c:1066:6: warning: Variable 'ret'
> > > > is reassigned a value before the old one has
> > > > been used. [redundantAssignment]
> > > >     ret = uverbs_request(attrs, &cmd, sizeof(cmd));
> > > >         ^
> > > >    drivers/infiniband/core/uverbs_cmd.c:1064:0: note: Variable 'ret' is
> > > > reassigned a value before the old one has been
> > > > used.
> > > >     int    ret = -EINVAL;
> > > >    ^
> > > >
> > > > Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>
> > > > Signed-off-by: Leon Romanovsky <leonro@mellanox.com>
> > > >  drivers/infiniband/core/uverbs_cmd.c | 12 ++++++------
> > > >  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/drivers/infiniband/core/uverbs_cmd.c b/drivers/infiniband/core/uverbs_cmd.c
> > > > index a66fc3e37a74..7d2b4258f573 100644
> > > > +++ b/drivers/infiniband/core/uverbs_cmd.c
> > > > @@ -558,9 +558,9 @@ static int ib_uverbs_open_xrcd(struct uverbs_attr_bundle *attrs)
> > > >  	struct ib_uverbs_open_xrcd	cmd;
> > > >  	struct ib_uxrcd_object         *obj;
> > > >  	struct ib_xrcd                 *xrcd = NULL;
> > > > -	struct fd			f = {NULL, 0};
> > > > +	struct fd f = {};
> > > >  	struct inode                   *inode = NULL;
> > > > -	int				ret = 0;
> > > > +	int ret;
> > > >  	int				new_xrcd = 0;
> > > >  	struct ib_device *ib_dev;
> > >
> > > I don't mind removing the whitespace, but changing it for just some of the
> > > variables makes it harder to read the code IMO.
> >
> > I wanted to remove for all variables in the same patch but was afraid to hear
> > opposition and waste my time on redoing it.
> >
> > Once we decide that this should be done, we will change. It will take less than
> > ten seconds with clang-formatter.
>
> It has been something that is going on slowly, I'm not sure a big
> reformatting is a good idea, it really messes up backporting
>
> Maybe these changes could be moved to the end so it is more readable?

Nice, I'll do it.

>
> Jason