* [PATCH v2] Staging: vt6656: Checkpatch fix: else after break or return
@ 2015-01-12 16:51 Emrys Bayliss
2015-01-13 5:23 ` Sudip Mukherjee
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Emrys Bayliss @ 2015-01-12 16:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: forest, gregkh, tvboxspy; +Cc: devel, linux-kernel, Emrys Bayliss
This patch fixes the following checkpatch.pl error:
rxtx.c:588: WARNING: else is not generally useful after a break or return
Signed-off-by: Emrys Bayliss <emrys@paradise.net.nz>
---
drivers/staging/vt6656/rxtx.c | 2 --
1 file changed, 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/staging/vt6656/rxtx.c b/drivers/staging/vt6656/rxtx.c
index ea5140a..0cce140 100644
--- a/drivers/staging/vt6656/rxtx.c
+++ b/drivers/staging/vt6656/rxtx.c
@@ -574,8 +574,6 @@ static u16 vnt_fill_cts_head(struct vnt_usb_send_context *tx_context,
return vnt_rxtx_datahead_g(tx_context, &buf->data_head);
}
-
- return 0;
}
static u16 vnt_rxtx_rts(struct vnt_usb_send_context *tx_context,
--
2.2.1
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2] Staging: vt6656: Checkpatch fix: else after break or return
2015-01-12 16:51 [PATCH v2] Staging: vt6656: Checkpatch fix: else after break or return Emrys Bayliss
@ 2015-01-13 5:23 ` Sudip Mukherjee
2015-01-13 5:58 ` Greg KH
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Sudip Mukherjee @ 2015-01-13 5:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Emrys Bayliss; +Cc: forest, gregkh, tvboxspy, devel, linux-kernel
On Tue, Jan 13, 2015 at 03:51:36AM +1100, Emrys Bayliss wrote:
> This patch fixes the following checkpatch.pl error:
> rxtx.c:588: WARNING: else is not generally useful after a break or return
was the checkpatch error solved with this change? have you checked?
and the checkpatch is giving error at line 558 and not at 588.
>
> Signed-off-by: Emrys Bayliss <emrys@paradise.net.nz>
> ---
> drivers/staging/vt6656/rxtx.c | 2 --
> 1 file changed, 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/vt6656/rxtx.c b/drivers/staging/vt6656/rxtx.c
> index ea5140a..0cce140 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/vt6656/rxtx.c
> +++ b/drivers/staging/vt6656/rxtx.c
> @@ -574,8 +574,6 @@ static u16 vnt_fill_cts_head(struct vnt_usb_send_context *tx_context,
>
> return vnt_rxtx_datahead_g(tx_context, &buf->data_head);
> }
> -
> - return 0;
any reason why this return was removed ?
sudip
> }
>
> static u16 vnt_rxtx_rts(struct vnt_usb_send_context *tx_context,
> --
> 2.2.1
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2] Staging: vt6656: Checkpatch fix: else after break or return
2015-01-13 5:23 ` Sudip Mukherjee
@ 2015-01-13 5:58 ` Greg KH
2015-01-13 6:24 ` Sudip Mukherjee
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Greg KH @ 2015-01-13 5:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Sudip Mukherjee; +Cc: Emrys Bayliss, forest, tvboxspy, devel, linux-kernel
On Tue, Jan 13, 2015 at 10:53:12AM +0530, Sudip Mukherjee wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 13, 2015 at 03:51:36AM +1100, Emrys Bayliss wrote:
> > This patch fixes the following checkpatch.pl error:
> > rxtx.c:588: WARNING: else is not generally useful after a break or return
>
> was the checkpatch error solved with this change? have you checked?
>
> and the checkpatch is giving error at line 558 and not at 588.
>
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Emrys Bayliss <emrys@paradise.net.nz>
> > ---
> > drivers/staging/vt6656/rxtx.c | 2 --
> > 1 file changed, 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/staging/vt6656/rxtx.c b/drivers/staging/vt6656/rxtx.c
> > index ea5140a..0cce140 100644
> > --- a/drivers/staging/vt6656/rxtx.c
> > +++ b/drivers/staging/vt6656/rxtx.c
> > @@ -574,8 +574,6 @@ static u16 vnt_fill_cts_head(struct vnt_usb_send_context *tx_context,
> >
> > return vnt_rxtx_datahead_g(tx_context, &buf->data_head);
> > }
> > -
> > - return 0;
>
> any reason why this return was removed ?
Because it's not needed.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2] Staging: vt6656: Checkpatch fix: else after break or return
2015-01-13 5:58 ` Greg KH
@ 2015-01-13 6:24 ` Sudip Mukherjee
2015-01-13 6:48 ` Sudip Mukherjee
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Sudip Mukherjee @ 2015-01-13 6:24 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Greg KH; +Cc: Emrys Bayliss, forest, tvboxspy, devel, linux-kernel
On Mon, Jan 12, 2015 at 09:58:17PM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 13, 2015 at 10:53:12AM +0530, Sudip Mukherjee wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 13, 2015 at 03:51:36AM +1100, Emrys Bayliss wrote:
> > > This patch fixes the following checkpatch.pl error:
> > > rxtx.c:588: WARNING: else is not generally useful after a break or return
> >
> > was the checkpatch error solved with this change? have you checked?
> >
> > and the checkpatch is giving error at line 558 and not at 588.
> >
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Emrys Bayliss <emrys@paradise.net.nz>
> > > ---
> > > drivers/staging/vt6656/rxtx.c | 2 --
> > > 1 file changed, 2 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/staging/vt6656/rxtx.c b/drivers/staging/vt6656/rxtx.c
> > > index ea5140a..0cce140 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/staging/vt6656/rxtx.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/staging/vt6656/rxtx.c
> > > @@ -574,8 +574,6 @@ static u16 vnt_fill_cts_head(struct vnt_usb_send_context *tx_context,
> > >
> > > return vnt_rxtx_datahead_g(tx_context, &buf->data_head);
> > > }
> > > -
> > > - return 0;
> >
> > any reason why this return was removed ?
>
> Because it's not needed.
yes, it is not needed. but the way Emrys Bayliss has changed the code, then we will get a compiler warning about no return statement.
the code becomes :
if (condition) {
...
return vnt_rxtx_datahead_g_fb(tx_context, &buf->data_head);
} else {
...
return vnt_rxtx_datahead_g(tx_context, &buf->data_head);
}
I would have removed that return when the code becomes:
if (condition) {
...
return vnt_rxtx_datahead_g_fb(tx_context, &buf->data_head);
}
...
return vnt_rxtx_datahead_g(tx_context, &buf->data_head);
or am i wrong in this ?
sudip
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2] Staging: vt6656: Checkpatch fix: else after break or return
2015-01-13 6:24 ` Sudip Mukherjee
@ 2015-01-13 6:48 ` Sudip Mukherjee
2015-01-13 10:59 ` Dan Carpenter
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Sudip Mukherjee @ 2015-01-13 6:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Greg KH; +Cc: Emrys Bayliss, forest, tvboxspy, devel, linux-kernel
On Tue, Jan 13, 2015 at 11:54:27AM +0530, Sudip Mukherjee wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 12, 2015 at 09:58:17PM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 13, 2015 at 10:53:12AM +0530, Sudip Mukherjee wrote:
> > >
> > > any reason why this return was removed ?
> >
> > Because it's not needed.
>
> yes, it is not needed. but the way Emrys Bayliss has changed the code, then we will get a compiler warning about no return statement.
i should have mentioned in my last mail that compiler will give waring if we compile with W=3
sudip
> the code becomes :
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2] Staging: vt6656: Checkpatch fix: else after break or return
2015-01-13 6:48 ` Sudip Mukherjee
@ 2015-01-13 10:59 ` Dan Carpenter
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Dan Carpenter @ 2015-01-13 10:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Sudip Mukherjee
Cc: Greg KH, tvboxspy, devel, Emrys Bayliss, forest, linux-kernel
On Tue, Jan 13, 2015 at 12:18:40PM +0530, Sudip Mukherjee wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 13, 2015 at 11:54:27AM +0530, Sudip Mukherjee wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 12, 2015 at 09:58:17PM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jan 13, 2015 at 10:53:12AM +0530, Sudip Mukherjee wrote:
> > > >
> > > > any reason why this return was removed ?
> > >
> > > Because it's not needed.
> >
> > yes, it is not needed. but the way Emrys Bayliss has changed the code, then we will get a compiler warning about no return statement.
> i should have mentioned in my last mail that compiler will give waring if we compile with W=3
>
1) Your compiler is crap.
2) You should ignore obviously incorrect warnings.
I'm using GCC 4.7.2 and it doesn't give a warning for this. W=3 gives a
million other totally worthless warnings though. W=3 is not useful.
regards,
dan carpenter
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2015-01-13 11:00 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2015-01-12 16:51 [PATCH v2] Staging: vt6656: Checkpatch fix: else after break or return Emrys Bayliss
2015-01-13 5:23 ` Sudip Mukherjee
2015-01-13 5:58 ` Greg KH
2015-01-13 6:24 ` Sudip Mukherjee
2015-01-13 6:48 ` Sudip Mukherjee
2015-01-13 10:59 ` Dan Carpenter
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox