[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(-)

[PATCH 03/20] scsi: lpfc: lpfc_nvme: drop useless LIST_HEAD

[Julia Lawall]

Drop LIST_HEAD where the variable it declares is never used.

These were introduced with the file, but were not even used
at that time.

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

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

Fixes: 01649561a8b4b ("scsi: lpfc: NVME Initiator: bind to nvme_fc api")
Signed-off-by: Julia Lawall <Julia.Lawall@lip6.fr>

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

 drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_nvme.c |    2 --
 1 file changed, 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_nvme.c b/drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_nvme.c
index 4c66b19e6199..2119f36213e4 100644
--- a/drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_nvme.c
+++ b/drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_nvme.c
@@ -2234,9 +2234,7 @@ lpfc_new_nvme_buf(struct lpfc_vport *vport, int num_to_alloc)
 	dma_addr_t pdma_phys_sgl;
 	uint16_t iotag, lxri = 0;
 	int bcnt, num_posted;
-	LIST_HEAD(prep_nblist);
 	LIST_HEAD(post_nblist);
-	LIST_HEAD(nvme_nblist);
 
 	for (bcnt = 0; bcnt < num_to_alloc; bcnt++) {
 		lpfc_ncmd = kzalloc(sizeof(struct lpfc_nvme_buf), GFP_KERNEL);

[PATCH 04/20] scsi: lpfc: lpfc_scsi: drop useless LIST_HEAD

[Julia Lawall]

Drop LIST_HEAD where the variable it declares is never used.

These were introduced in 8a9d2e8003040 ("[SCSI] lpfc 8.3.31:
Correct handling of SLI4-port XRI resource-provisioning profile
change"), but were not even used at that time.

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

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

Fixes: 8a9d2e8003040 ("[SCSI] lpfc 8.3.31: Correct handling of SLI4-port XRI resource-provisioning profile change")
Signed-off-by: Julia Lawall <Julia.Lawall@lip6.fr>

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

 drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_scsi.c |    2 --
 1 file changed, 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_scsi.c b/drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_scsi.c
index b4f1a840b3b4..dd415d783593 100644
--- a/drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_scsi.c
+++ b/drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_scsi.c
@@ -805,9 +805,7 @@ lpfc_new_scsi_buf_s4(struct lpfc_vport *vport, int num_to_alloc)
 	dma_addr_t pdma_phys_bpl;
 	uint16_t iotag, lxri = 0;
 	int bcnt, num_posted, sgl_size;
-	LIST_HEAD(prep_sblist);
 	LIST_HEAD(post_sblist);
-	LIST_HEAD(scsi_sblist);
 
 	sgl_size = phba->cfg_sg_dma_buf_size -
 		(sizeof(struct fcp_cmnd) + sizeof(struct fcp_rsp));

[PATCH 05/20] scsi: lpfc: lpfc_sli: drop useless LIST_HEAD

[Julia Lawall]

Drop LIST_HEAD where the variable it declares has never
been 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: 895427bd012ce ("scsi: lpfc: NVME Initiator: Base modifications")
Signed-off-by: Julia Lawall <Julia.Lawall@lip6.fr>

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

 drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_sli.c |    1 -
 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_sli.c b/drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_sli.c
index 30734caf77e1..13fe9d3331b9 100644
--- a/drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_sli.c
+++ b/drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_sli.c
@@ -3948,7 +3948,6 @@ lpfc_sli_abort_iocb_ring(struct lpfc_hba *phba, struct lpfc_sli_ring *pring)
 void
 lpfc_sli_abort_wqe_ring(struct lpfc_hba *phba, struct lpfc_sli_ring *pring)
 {
-	LIST_HEAD(completions);
 	struct lpfc_iocbq *iocb, *next_iocb;
 
 	if (pring->ringno == LPFC_ELS_RING)

[PATCH 10/20] scsi: qla2xxx: drop useless LIST_HEAD

[Julia Lawall]

Drop LIST_HEAD where the variable it declares is never used.

The uses of new_fcports were removed in 726b85487067 ("qla2xxx:
Add framework for async fabric discovery"), but not the
declaration.

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

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

Fixes: 726b85487067 ("qla2xxx: Add framework for async fabric discovery")
Signed-off-by: Julia Lawall <Julia.Lawall@lip6.fr>

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

 drivers/scsi/qla2xxx/qla_init.c |    1 -
 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/drivers/scsi/qla2xxx/qla_init.c b/drivers/scsi/qla2xxx/qla_init.c
index 364bb52ed2a6..d72e3ad97a54 100644
--- a/drivers/scsi/qla2xxx/qla_init.c
+++ b/drivers/scsi/qla2xxx/qla_init.c
@@ -5400,7 +5400,6 @@ qla2x00_configure_fabric(scsi_qla_host_t *vha)
 	fc_port_t	*fcport;
 	uint16_t	mb[MAILBOX_REGISTER_COUNT];
 	uint16_t	loop_id;
-	LIST_HEAD(new_fcports);
 	struct qla_hw_data *ha = vha->hw;
 	int		discovery_gen;
 

Re: [PATCH 00/20] drop useless LIST_HEAD

[SF Markus Elfring]

> Drop LIST_HEAD where the variable it declares is never used.

Do you know any more places where calls of other macros can be deleted?

Regards,
Markus

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel

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(-)
>

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(-)
> >
>

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-L2FTfq7BK8M@public.gmane.org> 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-L2FTfq7BK8M@public.gmane.org> 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(-)
>> >
>>
>

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.

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.
> 

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