Re: [PATCH mptcp-next v2 01/36] mptcp: drop else in mptcp_pm_addr_families_match

[Matthieu Baerts <matttbe@kernel.org>]

Hi Geliang,

On 22/10/2024 11:14, Geliang Tang wrote:
> From: Geliang Tang <tanggeliang@kylinos.cn>
> 
> The helper mptcp_pm_addr_families_match() uses "if-else" to handle IPv6
> and IPv4 addresses separately. But the last line of "if" code block is
> a "return" statement. In this case, no need to use an "else" statement.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Geliang Tang <tanggeliang@kylinos.cn>
> ---
>  net/mptcp/pm.c | 3 +--
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/net/mptcp/pm.c b/net/mptcp/pm.c
> index 16c336c51940..f3d354a72c94 100644
> --- a/net/mptcp/pm.c
> +++ b/net/mptcp/pm.c
> @@ -495,9 +495,8 @@ bool mptcp_pm_addr_families_match(const struct sock *sk,
>  		return !loc_is_v4 && !rem_is_v4;
>  
>  	return loc_is_v4 == rem_is_v4;
> -#else
> -	return mptcp_is_v4 && loc->family == AF_INET && rem->family == AF_INET;
>  #endif
> +	return mptcp_is_v4 && loc->family == AF_INET && rem->family == AF_INET;

I think some static analytic tools will complain because if
CONFIG_MPTCP_IPV6 is enabled, the code will look like this:

  return loc_is_v4 == rem_is_v4;
  return mptcp_is_v4 && (...)

Two 'return' in a row, the 2nd return is never used, there will be a
warning somewhere.

Also, I don't it is worth it, and it looks clearer with the #else. Is it
OK to drop this patch when applying the series?

>  }
>  
>  void mptcp_pm_data_reset(struct mptcp_sock *msk)

Cheers,
Matt
-- 
Sponsored by the NGI0 Core fund.