[PATCH] scsi: sli4: Remove code duplication

[PATCH] scsi: sli4: Remove code duplication

[coolrrsh]

From: Rajeshwar R Shinde <coolrrsh@gmail.com>

In the function sli_xmit_bls_rsp64_wqe, the 'if' and 'else' conditions 
evaluates the same expression and gives same output. So removing the redundant 
code duplication to optimise the code.

This fixes warning such as:
drivers/scsi/elx/libefc_sli/sli4.c:2320:2-4: WARNING: possible condition with no effect (if == else)

Signed-off-by: Rajeshwar R Shinde <coolrrsh@gmail.com>
---
 drivers/scsi/elx/libefc_sli/sli4.c | 8 ++------
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/scsi/elx/libefc_sli/sli4.c b/drivers/scsi/elx/libefc_sli/sli4.c
index 8f96049f62dd..5e7fb110bc3f 100644
--- a/drivers/scsi/elx/libefc_sli/sli4.c
+++ b/drivers/scsi/elx/libefc_sli/sli4.c
@@ -2317,12 +2317,8 @@ sli_xmit_bls_rsp64_wqe(struct sli4 *sli, void *buf,
 		SLI4_GENERIC_CONTEXT_VPI << SLI4_BLS_RSP_WQE_CT_SHFT;
 		bls->context_tag = cpu_to_le16(params->vpi);
 
-		if (params->s_id != U32_MAX)
-			bls->local_n_port_id_dword |=
-				cpu_to_le32(params->s_id & 0x00ffffff);
-		else
-			bls->local_n_port_id_dword |=
-				cpu_to_le32(params->s_id & 0x00ffffff);
+		bls->local_n_port_id_dword |=
+			cpu_to_le32(params->s_id & 0x00ffffff);
 
 		dw_ridflags = (dw_ridflags & ~SLI4_BLS_RSP_RID) |
 			       (params->d_id & SLI4_BLS_RSP_RID);
-- 
2.25.1

Re: [PATCH] scsi: sli4: Remove code duplication

[Randy Dunlap]

Hi--

On 8/16/23 01:50, coolrrsh@gmail.com wrote:
> From: Rajeshwar R Shinde <coolrrsh@gmail.com>
> 
> In the function sli_xmit_bls_rsp64_wqe, the 'if' and 'else' conditions 
> evaluates the same expression and gives same output. So removing the redundant 
> code duplication to optimise the code.
> 
> This fixes warning such as:
> drivers/scsi/elx/libefc_sli/sli4.c:2320:2-4: WARNING: possible condition with no effect (if == else)

What tool produces this message?

> Signed-off-by: Rajeshwar R Shinde <coolrrsh@gmail.com>
> ---
>  drivers/scsi/elx/libefc_sli/sli4.c | 8 ++------
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/elx/libefc_sli/sli4.c b/drivers/scsi/elx/libefc_sli/sli4.c
> index 8f96049f62dd..5e7fb110bc3f 100644
> --- a/drivers/scsi/elx/libefc_sli/sli4.c
> +++ b/drivers/scsi/elx/libefc_sli/sli4.c
> @@ -2317,12 +2317,8 @@ sli_xmit_bls_rsp64_wqe(struct sli4 *sli, void *buf,
>  		SLI4_GENERIC_CONTEXT_VPI << SLI4_BLS_RSP_WQE_CT_SHFT;
>  		bls->context_tag = cpu_to_le16(params->vpi);
>  
> -		if (params->s_id != U32_MAX)
> -			bls->local_n_port_id_dword |=
> -				cpu_to_le32(params->s_id & 0x00ffffff);
> -		else
> -			bls->local_n_port_id_dword |=
> -				cpu_to_le32(params->s_id & 0x00ffffff);
> +		bls->local_n_port_id_dword |=
> +			cpu_to_le32(params->s_id & 0x00ffffff);

That could be correct. Or there could be a bug there.
Who knows? I don't.

But maybe it doesn't matter since AFAICT that field isn't used
anywhere after it is set.

>  
>  		dw_ridflags = (dw_ridflags & ~SLI4_BLS_RSP_RID) |
>  			       (params->d_id & SLI4_BLS_RSP_RID);

-- 
~Randy