* [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